Westminster Politics

"£58.8bn could have:

- built X number of hospitals
- trained & employed Y number of nurses / doctors / teachers / paramedics etc
- funded Z number of community youth hubs

...but the Tories used a pandemic to funnel this to friends via VIP lanes"

You could use it for almost any sector and it would hit home.


On another note, I spotted as I was walking my dog this morning, a house in the entrance to our estate has a Tory Council election pamphlet in their window...I wanted to throw a fecking brick through it!
 
Jericholyte2 said:
I’m afraid in the two-party, FPTP system that we have, not voting Labour / not voting strategically to get the Tories out is ‘happily having another 5 years of this story government’.

No fringe party is getting in to a coalition with any meaningful say.

Yeah, sure, we’d all like Starmer to be better than he is, but he’s what we’ve got right now as the only alternative to this gang of corrupt scumbags.

So you ask, is Starmer’s Labour an improvement (no matter how small you think it might be. I personally believe getting the government to actually do its job would be a marked improvement)?

If it is then you vote for it.

Then at the next election you vote for the next best option, then the next and the next.

This country does not do radical shifts, especially to the Left. The best we can hope for is incremental improvement.
Click to expand...
Regardless of the 2 party system. It does not mean happiness will play any part of the Tories getting in for another 5 years. Would be more disappointment in what has happened to the Labour party.

I can't endorse Starmers lies with a vote right now. I'm hoping things will change, but equally I currently have little to no faith in Starmers leadership bringing about positive change. We've been here before with Blair in the 2000s.

To be honest I don't demand a radical shift to the left from Starmer. But I do demand honesty. Do you recall his 10 pledges?
 
Mr Pigeon said:
She probably printed off the only copy and ate it under her bridge, the fecking troll.
Click to expand...
She probably went back to the office and printed off another 200 copies and then headed back to the bridge with a jug of gravy.
 
ZupZup said:
I personally wouldn’t vote Labour currently because it would be a vindication of how awful they are at the moment. It would be seen as “see, you win by being a Tory lite party”… so that is all we will get served up in future. Tory A team and Tory B team. It’s a shame because I live in a seat which has a very reasonable chance to turn red for the first time ever.
Click to expand...

Good lord this is maddening. Properly insane.
 
Pexbo said:
She probably went back to the office and printed off another 200 copies and then headed back to the bridge with a jug of gravy.
Click to expand...
She probably copied the copies so she had 102,400 copies and then headed back to the bridge and pulled out her Tory cock and sprayed Tory wank juice all over the paper and then ate the paper covered in Tory wank juice then pulled out her backup Tory cock and sprayed backup Tory wank juice all over some poor people and then ate them too, the fecking gowl.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Regardless of the 2 party system. It does not mean happiness will play any part of the Tories getting in for another 5 years. Would be more disappointment in what has happened to the Labour party.

I can't endorse Starmers lies with a vote right now. I'm hoping things will change, but equally I currently have little to no faith in Starmers leadership bringing about positive change. We've been here before with Blair in the 2000s.

To be honest I don't demand a radical shift to the left from Starmer. But I do demand honesty. Do you recall his 10 pledges?
Click to expand...

I do, and I completely understand resentment about it, but just look at what's across the isle! Just in the last two weeks we've seen nonsense about storing refugees in barges, confirmation that we don't have a safe & legal route from Iran, Attenborough confirming not one river in England is considered clean, Home Office having to admit their biggest claim about immigrants was a lie, that MP getting stung being willing to sell white papers to a fictional gambling company. It goes on and on and on and on and on.....

I see on a daily basis what 13yrs of Tory rule has done to this country and I genuinely fear that the country will not survive as we know it if they win in 2024. So if it's a battle between the guy who's lied recently and the party who lie like others breathe, I take the lesser of the evils.

Do I have great faith that they'll do a good job, not really. To be honest the economic position we're currently in will make that nearly impossible, but the Tories have broken everything in this country! And I'm desperate for that to stop!

I think you also greatly underestimate the good that Blair did for the country in terms of access to higher education, minimum wage, sure starts etc (yeah I know)...


Your version of ‘not endorsing’ Starmer for his lies will tacitly and implicitly endorse the Tories and theirs, which spread higher and farther than Starmer’s by a country mile! If the Tories haven’t done enough over the last 13yrs for you to want to boot every last one of them out of the office and let the chips fall where they may, then you’re a glutton for punishment and I can’t help you.
 
Last edited:
Mr Pigeon said:
She probably copied the copies so she had 102,400 copies and then headed back to the bridge and pulled out her Tory cock and sprayed Tory wank juice all over the paper and then ate the paper covered in Tory wank juice then pulled out her backup Tory cock and sprayed backup Tory wank juice all over some poor people and then ate them too, the fecking gowl.
Click to expand...
That’s classic Coffey that is
 
Jericholyte2 said:
I’m voting Starmer because he’s the competent option of the two.

One is currently, actively bleeding this country dry and has been for 13yrs. Hospitals, libraries, sure start programs, all closed down. The basic tenets and covenants of being in government are not being met.

I believe Starmer would take the office of Prime Minister more seriously than any of the last 3 PMs and any member of the current cabinet.

I believe Starmer would TRY to have the government commit to its purpose, within the economic framework we’re in right now.

I believe, with his Shadow Cabinet, that there are enough honest politicians to TRY to implement policies they’ve laid out (FSM extensions etc).

I believe that Starmer would implement tougher windfall taxes on oil companies to stop them gouging us, because he and the entire Party have been calling for it for over a year.

I believe he would TRY to make his government work for people, not just HIS people like Sunak, Truss, Johnson, May and Cameron have done.

And I don’t k or how people can’t see that.

I’d highly recommend the episode of Full Disclosure that James O’Brien did with him, you get a much better look at his as a person.
Click to expand...

The thing is alot of your argument is based on again reasons to not vote tory rather than reasons to vote Starmer. For example:

- Paragraph 2 applicable to any potential labour leader and most opposition party leader.

- Paragraph 3 same as above.

- Paragraph 4 based on a belief. Surely you believe corbyn would have done that too? Or Lib Dems? Or Greens? Again most partys and party leaders.

Anyway without sounding like a broken record. It is all very much just beliefs on what we think. And that's exactly where we all are. Playing this guessing game of thinking rather than knowing.

A good leader in my opinion should first and foremost be able to articulate a clear plan and message to his target audience. We still have no idea where Starmer stands. He's like a sea-saw.

A year ago he's quoted speaking to a Lgbt charity about how he's supporting trans rights and stuff. A year later he's contradicting himself.

A year ago he's quoted saying he's supportive of cannabis reforms. The next year he's saying the smell of cannabis is destroying lives and that his focus is on anti social behaviour suddenly. A real non problem in the Current state of affairs.

Even the Gary Linekar stuff they were very hush hush and on the fence. Even the female mp on Question Time that week was criticising the language he used too. And tbh she didn't speak very well at all, she wasn't very sharp. But anyway it was only after the public backlash to Linekar being suspended that Starmer finally took a public stance.

I know someone quoted me earlier laughing at me talking about the election after next. But unfortunately if you actually want to be able to implement radical reforms then there's only so much which can be achieved in 5 years. And it's going to take alot longer than 5 years to fix this current sorry state of affairs.

Given the current economic climate, unless things radically change by 2025, whoever takes over is going to be taking over a shit show. Once cornavirus and brexit happened I actually thought labour losing in 2019 may have been a blessing in disguise. Because things were evidently going to get worse and no matter how well Labour could have managed it, people would still point back to "but it was better in 2018" or "everything went to shit when labour took over" and they'd likely get kicked out next election.

If you think back to 2010, the main driver for labour losing the election was the global recession. However the UK tabloids towed the "labour can't be trusted with the economy" line and thus labour lost the election. Had the recession never happened then things may have been very different.

So considering the current economic climate we're in and that things may very well need to get worse before they get better. I think for me that we need a leader that is willing to try and make those radical changes. Not one who is focused on graffiti and refusing to support the "militant unions".

With all the above said, I'd still rather explore Starmers labour over another tory flavour. But it would be very much so to keep torys out rather than buying into Starmers vision. Have to say though I do like a bit of Raynor and her potty mouth. The more I think about it she's kind of one of those under rated sexy not sexy kind of people. I would.
 
Last edited:
ThehatchetMan said:
The thing is alot of your argument is based on again reasons to not vote tory rather than reasons to vote Starmer. For example:

- Paragraph 2 applicable to any potential labour leader and most opposition party leader.

- Paragraph 3 same as above.

- Paragraph 4 based on a belief. Surely you believe corbyn would have done that too? Or Lib Dems? Or Greens? Again most partys and party leaders.

Anyway without sounding like a broken record. It is all very much just beliefs on what we think. And that's exactly where we all are. Playing this guessing game of thinking rather than knowing.

A good leader in my opinion should first and foremost be able to articulate a clear plan and message to his target audience. We still have no idea where Starmer stands. He's like a sea-saw.

A year ago he's quoted speaking to a Lgbt charity about how he's supporting trans rights and stuff. A year later he's contradicting himself.

A year ago he's quoted saying he's supportive of cannabis reforms. The next year he's saying the smell of cannabis is destroying lives and that his focus is on anti social behaviour suddenly. A real non problem in the Current state of affairs.

Even the Gary Linekar stuff they were very hush hush and on the fence. Even the female mp on Question Time that week was criticising the language he used too. And tbh she didn't speak very well at all, she wasn't very sharp. But anyway it was only after the public backlash to Linekar being suspended that Starmer finally took a public stance.

I know someone quoted me earlier laughing at me talking about the election after next. But unfortunately if you actually want to be able to implement radical reforms then there's only so much which can be achieved in 5 years. And it's going to take alot longer than 5 years to fix this current sorry state of affairs.

Given the current economic climate, unless things radically change by 2025, whoever takes over is going to be taking over a shit show. Once cornavirus and brexit happened I actually thought labour losing in 2019 may have been a blessing in disguise. Because things were evidently going to get worse and no matter how well Labour could have managed it, people would still point back to "but it was better in 2018" or "everything went to shit when labour took over" and they'd likely get kicked out next election.

If you think back to 2010, the main driver for labour losing the election was the global recession. However the UK tabloids towed the "labour can't be trusted with the economy" line and thus labour lost the election. Had the recession never happened then things may have been very different.

So considering the current economic climate we're in and that things may very well need to get worse before they get better. I think for me that we need a leader that is willing to try and make those radical changes. Not one who is focused on graffiti and refusing to support the "militant unions".

With all the above said, I'd still rather explore Starmers labour over another tory flavour. But it would be very much so to keep torys out rather than buying into Starmers vision. Have to say though I do like a bit of Raynor and her potty mouth. The more I think about it she's kind of one of those under rated sexy not sexy kind of people. I would.
Click to expand...

When we’re 18 months away from a GE and there’s no manifesto then you have to go through what you THINK a Party would do.

Yes I believed Corbyn would do the same which is why I voted for him in ‘17 and ‘19.

No I don’t believe Lib Dem / Greens etc would do the same because they’re not Parties that could ever have a majority in the current voting system.

I’ll say this, fundamentally we agree entirely on where we SHOULD be going and the type of leader we would prefer to have but, fundamentally when the current government is actively destroying the integrity of most institutions, I’ll take general competency over a pipe dream.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
I'd still rather explore Starmers labour over another tory flavour. But it would be very much so to keep torys out rather than buying into Starmers vision. Have to say though I do like a bit of Raynor and her potty mouth. The more I think about it she's kind of one of those under rated sexy not sexy kind of people. I would.
Click to expand...

And that's OK! It's OK to vote against something, not everything has to be a vote for a vision. First and foremost, I will be voting to kick the Tories OUT. We will see what his labour party is like when it is in power.
 
Jericholyte2 said:
When we’re 18 months away from a GE and there’s no manifesto then you have to go through what you THINK a Party would do.

Yes I believed Corbyn would do the same which is why I voted for him in ‘17 and ‘19.

No I don’t believe Lib Dem / Greens etc would do the same because they’re not Parties that could ever have a majority in the current voting system.

I’ll say this, fundamentally we agree entirely on where we SHOULD be going and the type of leader we would prefer to have but, fundamentally when the current government is actively destroying the integrity of most institutions, I’ll take general competency over a pipe dream.
Click to expand...
nickm said:
And that's OK! It's OK to vote against something, not everything has to be a vote for a vision. First and foremost, I will be voting to kick the Tories OUT. We will see what his labour party is like when it is in power.
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying it isn't OK. I probably dislike the Conservative party more than most members on here. I will however hold labour to the same standards and will be just as critical of them as and where I see fit. Criticising Starmer shouldn't be seen as supporting Torys.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
The thing is alot of your argument is based on again reasons to not vote tory rather than reasons to vote Starmer. For example:

- Paragraph 2 applicable to any potential labour leader and most opposition party leader.

- Paragraph 3 same as above.

- Paragraph 4 based on a belief. Surely you believe corbyn would have done that too? Or Lib Dems? Or Greens? Again most partys and party leaders.

Anyway without sounding like a broken record. It is all very much just beliefs on what we think. And that's exactly where we all are. Playing this guessing game of thinking rather than knowing.

A good leader in my opinion should first and foremost be able to articulate a clear plan and message to his target audience. We still have no idea where Starmer stands. He's like a sea-saw.

A year ago he's quoted speaking to a Lgbt charity about how he's supporting trans rights and stuff. A year later he's contradicting himself.

A year ago he's quoted saying he's supportive of cannabis reforms. The next year he's saying the smell of cannabis is destroying lives and that his focus is on anti social behaviour suddenly. A real non problem in the Current state of affairs.

Even the Gary Linekar stuff they were very hush hush and on the fence. Even the female mp on Question Time that week was criticising the language he used too. And tbh she didn't speak very well at all, she wasn't very sharp. But anyway it was only after the public backlash to Linekar being suspended that Starmer finally took a public stance.

I know someone quoted me earlier laughing at me talking about the election after next. But unfortunately if you actually want to be able to implement radical reforms then there's only so much which can be achieved in 5 years. And it's going to take alot longer than 5 years to fix this current sorry state of affairs.

Given the current economic climate, unless things radically change by 2025, whoever takes over is going to be taking over a shit show. Once cornavirus and brexit happened I actually thought labour losing in 2019 may have been a blessing in disguise. Because things were evidently going to get worse and no matter how well Labour could have managed it, people would still point back to "but it was better in 2018" or "everything went to shit when labour took over" and they'd likely get kicked out next election.

If you think back to 2010, the main driver for labour losing the election was the global recession. However the UK tabloids towed the "labour can't be trusted with the economy" line and thus labour lost the election. Had the recession never happened then things may have been very different.

So considering the current economic climate we're in and that things may very well need to get worse before they get better. I think for me that we need a leader that is willing to try and make those radical changes. Not one who is focused on graffiti and refusing to support the "militant unions".

With all the above said, I'd still rather explore Starmers labour over another tory flavour. But it would be very much so to keep torys out rather than buying into Starmers vision. Have to say though I do like a bit of Raynor and her potty mouth. The more I think about it she's kind of one of those under rated sexy not sexy kind of people. I would.
Click to expand...

Our country is broken. It took the Tories 13 years to get to ‘Refugees in Prison barges’ and for large swathes of the electorate to be cool with it.

Labour will need at least the same amount of time to make things better. They need your vote.

But sure. Clutch your pearls, stay home, don’t vote and hope for the best.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
When others are happy to have starmer simply because he isn't a tory then this also needs to be highlighted.

Without the promise of the dramatic reforms we need, a Labour government headed up by Starmer could very easily lose the election after next. And the classic lines "they're all as bad as each other" will never be truer.

What is it about Starmers vision that has you in such strong support?
Click to expand...
Starmer can always be replaced by his party. There’s been 13 years and multiple Tory pms of which the next always seems worse than the previous one. They’ve been lying and stealing from the public purse. I don’t get why peoples first priority is not to get them out. If this thread is anyway an indication of Joe Public then you’re stuck with the Tories for another 4 years. It will really be a case at that point if you voted for it and the more the country goes further and further into the shit, just remember who enabled this bunch
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Our country is broken. It took the Tories 13 years to get to ‘Refugees in Prison barges’ and for large swathes of the electorate to be cool with it.

Labour will need at least the same amount of time to make things better. They need your vote.

But sure. Clutch your pearls, stay home, don’t vote and hope for the best.
Click to expand...
Agree with the second paragraph.

Not sure what the third is about.

Some people get really upset over any criticism of starmer. You can be critical of both the governing party as well as the opposition.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
I don't think that's the case. If all Starmer is offering is a slightly different version of what's happening under the Tories, you could imagine the people he's trying to suck up will say, we may as well have the real thing.

If the country aren't sick of what has been happening with the Tories and Starmer only wants to please the xenophobes and Brexiters and hopes he can win their votes, the country's a lost cause anyway.

Why not be radical and do things that are good for the country and if the leader had any gumption or character, he could try and convince them. Still 18 months to go, wasted 3 years so far. Starmer is probably the most hopeless leader Labour have had since the war. And that's saying something.
Click to expand...

Most of the policies will come out before the election. We haven’t seen any of them this early as the Tories just nick them anyway. The problem with this country it just seems to pander to the same feckers who voted for Brexit.
 
golden_blunder said:
Starmer can always be replaced by his party. There’s been 13 years and multiple Tory pms of which the next always seems worse than the previous one. They’ve been lying and stealing from the public purse. I don’t get why peoples first priority is not to get them out. If this thread is anyway an indication of Joe Public then you’re stuck with the Tories for another 4 years. It will really be a case at that point if you voted for it and the more the country goes further and further into the shit, just remember who enabled this bunch
Click to expand...
He can indeed be replaced but that requires a vote of no confidence and he's doing his best to banish the party of more left leaning members. You won't read it on mainstream media but I suggest reading into the purge of more left leaning candidates as well as those with trade union connections by the NEC in the election pre selection process. Corbyn is of course one of the most highly documented cases but he is just one of many. Starmer is purging the party of the most left leaning members while replacing them with centrists. If you've got left wing political views then this isn't good.

Second paragraph is usual shite which others post here where if you criticise starmer apparently you're suddenly a tory supporter or someone who enables them.

Sometimes I think I prefix my post with "I WILL VOTE TACTICALLY TO GET TORIES IN" considering the replies from some.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Some people get really upset over any criticism of starmer. You can be critical of both the governing party as well as the opposition.
Click to expand...

ThehatchetMan said:
Sometimes I think I prefix my post with "I WILL VOTE TACTICALLY TO GET TORIES IN" considering the replies from some.
Click to expand...


There's 2 types of tory voters:

  • One is the proud and stupid, full on brexit, obnoxious type of tory voter, that will argue endlessly on a debate that you cannot win, because you can beat a pidgeon in chess.
  • The other is the "secret tory", who doesn't have the confidence to admit they're tories because they know people will rightly dislike them for it and when it comes to arguments they engage in 2 ways - anti-Labour rhetoric, and sealioning.

You come across like the second. Maybe you're not one of them, but you need to know, that's what you sound like.
 


A perfectly normal government in perfectly normal times!

It’s amazing how quick we’ve gone from ‘the MET needs to root out its institutional racism, misogyny & homophobia’ to ‘it’s not the police’s responsibility to tackle racism’!
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Nobody is saying it isn't OK. I probably dislike the Conservative party more than most members on here. I will however hold labour to the same standards and will be just as critical of them as and where I see fit. Criticising Starmer shouldn't be seen as supporting Torys.
Click to expand...
I have no problem criticising Starmer, if it is for the right reasons. Lack of vision, a certain woodenness, maybe over caution - all seem to be valid. Criticising him for recognising Corbynism was electoral cancer, and making Labour electable again, is the wrong reason.
 
Did Starmer make Labour electable, or did the unprecedented collapse of the Conservatives make the Conservatives unelectable? In any case, the election hasn't happened yet, we have no idea how electable Labour will actually turn out to be.
 
nimic said:
Did Starmer make Labour electable, or did the unprecedented collapse of the Conservatives make the Conservatives unelectable? In any case, the election hasn't happened yet, we have no idea how electable Labour will actually turn out to be.
Click to expand...
Well, true we don't yet know. But we can extrapolate.

I will observe what does seem to be a pattern with the Left, where Labour never gets credit for being electable, it's always a consequence of the Tories losing. ie Blair didn't win, it was the Tories unelectabilty/John Smith really etc. You see it in reverse with Corbyn, who was apparently electable (even though he wasn't) but it was various dark forces who prevented him winning.

No, I don't buy it. Starmer has positioned Labour as a credible alternative government and he should get credit for that.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
Well, true we don't yet know. But we can extrapolate.

I will observe that does seem to be a pattern with the Left where Labour never gets credit for being electable, it's always a consequence of the Tories losing. ie Blair didn't win, it was the Tories unelectabilty/John Smith really etc. You see it in reverse with Corbyn, who was apparently electable (even though he wasn't) but it was various dark forces who prevented him winning.

No, I don't buy it. Starmer has positioned Labour as a credible alternative government and he should get credit for that.
Click to expand...

Blair won a landslide off the back of his proposed policies (and Tory fatigue but still would have won regardless). Starmer has offered nothing at all.

What will this credible alternative government do differently? Let alone better!
 
Eplel said:
There's 2 types of tory voters:

  • One is the proud and stupid, full on brexit, obnoxious type of tory voter, that will argue endlessly on a debate that you cannot win, because you can beat a pidgeon in chess.
  • The other is the "secret tory", who doesn't have the confidence to admit they're tories because they know people will rightly dislike them for it and when it comes to arguments they engage in 2 ways - anti-Labour rhetoric, and sealioning.

You come across like the second. Maybe you're not one of them, but you need to know, that's what you sound like.
Click to expand...

The secret tory voter is probably more of the kind that supports right wing leaders in the Labour Party. As they get the same policies whether they vote Labour or tory.

I think if you ask most people who consider themselves supporters of momentum or the Labour socialist campaign group; the vast majority aren't starmer fans.

Starmers flavour of Labour is "Labour first" which is known as traditionally being a group with views to the right of traditional labour.

So if you want to compare anyone to a secret tory it's probably those endorsing Starmer. They probably put a cheeky vote for Boris at the last election due to corbyn being an "IRA sympathiser" or whatever other media bs they lapped up.
 
nickm said:
I have no problem criticising Starmer, if it is for the right reasons. Lack of vision, a certain woodenness, maybe over caution - all seem to be valid. Criticising him for recognising Corbynism was electoral cancer, and making Labour electable again, is the wrong reason.
Click to expand...
Corbyns 2017 election was the biggest gains labour have ever made in a GE, not quite electoral cancer. I think if you want to talk about electoral cancer your probably best talking about Ed Milliband, whose flavour is very similar to Starmers.

Corbyn had supporters who bought into his vision and people who wanted to vote for him for that vision. This thread is evident that nobody has reasons to vote Starmer. Everyone's reasons are based on believing he will do stuff he hasn't said he will do or to keep the torys out. There's a stark contrast.

Lord Buckethead could be leader of Labour and have the same lead in the polls. Because that lead in the polls is simply based on the tories self destructing rather than Starmers revolution or vision.

I have to say I'm quite surprised to find so many people that are right of centre on this forum as I was always under the impression most consider themselves left wing here. But I guess I must be one of the few true left wingers on here.
 
nimic said:
Did Starmer make Labour electable, or did the unprecedented collapse of the Conservatives make the Conservatives unelectable? In any case, the election hasn't happened yet, we have no idea how electable Labour will actually turn out to be.
Click to expand...
The latter. Doesn't even need to be a question.
 
Bert_ said:
Blair won a landslide off the back of his proposed policies (and Tory fatigue but still would have won regardless). Starmer has offered nothing at all.

What will this credible alternative government do differently? Let alone better!
Click to expand...
I bet you must be a secret tory voter too .

Anyone who doesn't endorse right wing labour leaders who purge the left wing candidates via the NEC is apparently one mate.

Starmer could have braverman, Patel, gullis, Boris and Fabricant in his labour shadow cabinet and some will be telling us how great and electable he and his cabinet are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.