| Just the 27 point lead for Labour 22:59 - Jan 17 with 10349 views | ElderGrizzly |
Tories back to Liz Truss levels of support.
But Starmer once wrote a textbook or something..
|  | | |  |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:43 - Jan 18 with 923 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:16 - Jan 18 by blueasfook |
I think I already made that clear Herbers? What party is going to be radically different though (IE. reverse the cuts to NHS, invest in infrastructure/housing/etc, take climate change seriously)? |
Corbyn's Labour....you blew your chance. |  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:45 - Jan 18 with 923 views | blueasfook |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:38 - Jan 18 by Herbivore |
Was it a Labour policy in 2019 for us to withdraw from NATO or scrap Trident? |
Not officially but he is on record saying he would review the Trident successort project should Labour have been elected. When the question was put to Emily Thornberry her answer was:
Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary – who is “sceptical” about Trident – was asked in an LBC radio interview to guarantee that backing for the missile system would definitely remain Labour policy after the review.
She replied: “Well no, of course not, if you are going to have a review, you have to have a review.”
Corbyn is also on record as saying he would like to "see NATO disbanded".
I think you are wasting your time trying to argue our NATO and nuclear defence programs would have been safe under Corbyn. |  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:46 - Jan 18 with 892 views | DJR |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:21 - Jan 18 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Also worth noting that taxes will have to rise substantially just to stay as we are (I.e no improvement to public services). Interest rates mean the cost of servicing our national debt is increasing, and inflation will increase the cost of providing services and infrastructure.
Labour will inherit a terrible mess. |
Agreed. Tory tax cuts appear to me to be designed to do one of two things.
1. Enable them to win the election, which seems unlikely.
2. Leave Labour with such a mess that the public quickly lose faith in them and so vote the Tories back into office sooner than might otherwise be the case. |  | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:49 - Jan 18 with 881 views | NthQldITFC |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:06 - Jan 18 by DJR |
Taken in isolation there is something in what you say, but to talk about tax cuts when the public finances and public services are in such a state is just wrong.
As it is, Reeves has already accepted the Tory NI cut, which leaves a £9 billion hole in the public finances, and has said she would support the pre-election Sunak income tax cuts, which would leave an even bigger black hole, so to talk about further tax cuts is madness.
Why can't parties just be honest, and say the public finance are in a mess, so talk of tax cuts is out of the question? With such a strong poll lead, I am not sure it would damage Labour that much, and might even resonate with many and prove they have some backbone and principles. [Post edited 18 Jan 13:09]
|
I wonder what range of collapsed public services, infrastructure and fkcued up environment we'll have to get to before the majority of us accept that a "me first, low taxes" outlook is destroying us all?
Can people not see the state of the country they live in, the trajectory of decay and how the selfish, materialistic attitude of the majority spells doom - a society collapsing around our plastic castles? When you measure your worth primarily by money you utterly devalue your soul. |  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:50 - Jan 18 with 879 views | Blueschev |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:45 - Jan 18 by blueasfook |
Not officially but he is on record saying he would review the Trident successort project should Labour have been elected. When the question was put to Emily Thornberry her answer was:
Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary – who is “sceptical” about Trident – was asked in an LBC radio interview to guarantee that backing for the missile system would definitely remain Labour policy after the review.
She replied: “Well no, of course not, if you are going to have a review, you have to have a review.”
Corbyn is also on record as saying he would like to "see NATO disbanded".
I think you are wasting your time trying to argue our NATO and nuclear defence programs would have been safe under Corbyn. |
Neither would have been Corbyn's decision to make. The Prime Minister is the leader of the government, they don't have executive power like a president. And had Labour won the election in 2019 there would not have been support in Parliament or even the PLP for either leaving NATO nor nuclear disarmament. [Post edited 18 Jan 13:54]
|  | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:50 - Jan 18 with 877 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:46 - Jan 18 by DJR |
Agreed. Tory tax cuts appear to me to be designed to do one of two things.
1. Enable them to win the election, which seems unlikely.
2. Leave Labour with such a mess that the public quickly lose faith in them and so vote the Tories back into office sooner than might otherwise be the case. |
1 appears to be failing and 2 is a certainty.
If the 47% Labour polling was repeated at a GE, even with the new boundaries it gives the Tories 41 seats. Oh well... | | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:52 - Jan 18 with 863 views | Herbivore |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:45 - Jan 18 by blueasfook |
Not officially but he is on record saying he would review the Trident successort project should Labour have been elected. When the question was put to Emily Thornberry her answer was:
Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary – who is “sceptical” about Trident – was asked in an LBC radio interview to guarantee that backing for the missile system would definitely remain Labour policy after the review.
She replied: “Well no, of course not, if you are going to have a review, you have to have a review.”
Corbyn is also on record as saying he would like to "see NATO disbanded".
I think you are wasting your time trying to argue our NATO and nuclear defence programs would have been safe under Corbyn. |
So leaving NATO and scrapping Trident weren't Labour policies, glad we've cleared that up. So you're basing the apparent threat to national security on something you think might have happened (despite the fact Corbyn couldn't have unilaterally decided to do those things without his party's support) but you seemingly don't see Johnson as the bigger threat based on stuff that, you know, actually happened? |  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:53 - Jan 18 with 859 views | Herbivore |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:50 - Jan 18 by Blueschev |
Neither would have been Corbyn's decision to make. The Prime Minister is the leader of the government, they don't have executive power like a president. And had Labour won the election in 2019 there would not have been support in Parliament or even the PLP for either leaving NATO nor nuclear disarmament. [Post edited 18 Jan 13:54]
|
Indeed. This shouldn't even need pointing out. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:56 - Jan 18 with 843 views | positivity |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:19 - Jan 18 by Herbivore |
The Green Party on most of those issues. |
though in the vast majority of areas, voting green is essentially one less vote that the tories need to get to win again...
labour are much better than the tories on all of those issues, (as are the lib dems and the greens), so my advice would be to vote for the best party who have a chance of winning in your area. |  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:57 - Jan 18 with 840 views | blueasfook |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:53 - Jan 18 by Herbivore |
Indeed. This shouldn't even need pointing out. |
So why go through the motions of a "review" if he couldn't change anything? | |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:58 - Jan 18 with 836 views | DJR |
This from a focus group of Tory to Labour switchers last week found the following.
* Tax cuts viewed as a "sweetener" just to get votes
* Keir Starmer seen as "weak", "spineless", "unchallenging", "boring" and - above all else - as having "no plan". They are voting Labour *despite* Keir Starmer rather than because of him. Lack of plan/back to square one attack by Sunak was the only clip that went down well.
The latter doesn't augur well for his standing when the going gets tough, as it is likely to do very early on. [Post edited 18 Jan 14:10]
| | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:01 - Jan 18 with 823 views | Blueschev |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:57 - Jan 18 by blueasfook |
So why go through the motions of a "review" if he couldn't change anything? |
I would imagine in the hope that the review would indicate the best course of action with regards to investing billions of taxpayers money. Not that the proposal of a review would have gone any further than the first cabinet meeting in this alternative reality. | | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:05 - Jan 18 with 804 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:38 - Jan 18 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Yes but it might prove more difficult if people pretend he's an antisemite. |
Perhaps he shouldn’t have given them so much material to work with…the best the Tories/press have come up with on Starmer is that as a lawyer he once defended some criminals… | | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:09 - Jan 18 with 793 views | Herbivore |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:57 - Jan 18 by blueasfook |
So why go through the motions of a "review" if he couldn't change anything? |
You don't think there's value in reviewing whether large projects that come at huge expense should be reviewed? Perhaps if the Tories had taken such an approach we wouldn't have wasted hundreds of millions on HS2 being partially delivered. I see you're conveniently not engaging with my original point, which was Johnson being more of a security risk based on things that have actually happened rather than things the right wing press successfully managed to get you worrying about. [Post edited 18 Jan 14:10]
| |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:17 - Jan 18 with 762 views | blueasfook |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:09 - Jan 18 by Herbivore |
You don't think there's value in reviewing whether large projects that come at huge expense should be reviewed? Perhaps if the Tories had taken such an approach we wouldn't have wasted hundreds of millions on HS2 being partially delivered. I see you're conveniently not engaging with my original point, which was Johnson being more of a security risk based on things that have actually happened rather than things the right wing press successfully managed to get you worrying about. [Post edited 18 Jan 14:10]
|
I don't remember BJ (lol) calling Hamas and Hezbollah his friends. Also as already discussed, our Trident programme and NATO membership wasn't under threat from him. If you are trying to say that somehow Boris Johnson is a bigger security risk than Corbyn then that's just ridiculous. I'd also wager that MI5 didn't open a file on BJ to investigate his links to the IRA. | |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:27 - Jan 18 with 714 views | factual_blue |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:58 - Jan 18 by DJR |
This from a focus group of Tory to Labour switchers last week found the following.
* Tax cuts viewed as a "sweetener" just to get votes
* Keir Starmer seen as "weak", "spineless", "unchallenging", "boring" and - above all else - as having "no plan". They are voting Labour *despite* Keir Starmer rather than because of him. Lack of plan/back to square one attack by Sunak was the only clip that went down well.
The latter doesn't augur well for his standing when the going gets tough, as it is likely to do very early on. [Post edited 18 Jan 14:10]
|
Assuming power, however, reveals the real person. Look at boris. |  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:29 - Jan 18 with 707 views | SomethingBlue |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:17 - Jan 18 by blueasfook |
I don't remember BJ (lol) calling Hamas and Hezbollah his friends. Also as already discussed, our Trident programme and NATO membership wasn't under threat from him. If you are trying to say that somehow Boris Johnson is a bigger security risk than Corbyn then that's just ridiculous. I'd also wager that MI5 didn't open a file on BJ to investigate his links to the IRA. |
You're obligingly doing exactly what they're asking you to do – engaging with hypotheticals rather than with actual things that have happened. | |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:30 - Jan 18 with 705 views | Blueschev |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:27 - Jan 18 by factual_blue |
Assuming power, however, reveals the real person. Look at boris. |
I'm pretty sure Johnson had revealed himself as a lying piece of sh1te long before he assumed any kind of power. | | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:31 - Jan 18 with 707 views | Herbivore |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:17 - Jan 18 by blueasfook |
I don't remember BJ (lol) calling Hamas and Hezbollah his friends. Also as already discussed, our Trident programme and NATO membership wasn't under threat from him. If you are trying to say that somehow Boris Johnson is a bigger security risk than Corbyn then that's just ridiculous. I'd also wager that MI5 didn't open a file on BJ to investigate his links to the IRA. |
If Johnson wasn't a security risk, why did Theresa May restrict his security clearance when he was Foreign Secretary? Why did he go against security advice to put the son of a Russian spy in the House of Lords? You seem happy to ignore people's actual actions in favour of relying on rhetoric that has been through various spin cycles in the right wing press, and much of it dating back a very long way. Do I think Johnson was a bigger security threat than Corbyn? Absolutely I do, and I've given you sound evidence for why I believe that. You have so far provided very little, aside from some historic things Corbyn said that there is no evidence would have ever been Labour policy under him.
Edit: Here's some further actual stuff Johnson did that made him a security risk: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mi5-boris-johnson-security-partyg [Post edited 18 Jan 14:33]
| |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:35 - Jan 18 with 684 views | factual_blue |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:30 - Jan 18 by Blueschev |
I'm pretty sure Johnson had revealed himself as a lying piece of sh1te long before he assumed any kind of power. |
Power also revealed him to be an incompetent, indecisive ditherer. | |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:54 - Jan 18 with 664 views | itfcjoe |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:31 - Jan 18 by Herbivore |
If Johnson wasn't a security risk, why did Theresa May restrict his security clearance when he was Foreign Secretary? Why did he go against security advice to put the son of a Russian spy in the House of Lords? You seem happy to ignore people's actual actions in favour of relying on rhetoric that has been through various spin cycles in the right wing press, and much of it dating back a very long way. Do I think Johnson was a bigger security threat than Corbyn? Absolutely I do, and I've given you sound evidence for why I believe that. You have so far provided very little, aside from some historic things Corbyn said that there is no evidence would have ever been Labour policy under him.
Edit: Here's some further actual stuff Johnson did that made him a security risk: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mi5-boris-johnson-security-partyg [Post edited 18 Jan 14:33]
|
Corbyn's reaction to the Salisbury poisoning was pretty wild, and how would he have fared as PM when Putin was invading Ukraine when he has tended to take an anti-US (and by extension UK) to nearly every piece of foreign policy we can think of.
Boris did step up in the Ukraine war for them, but his loose morals and living style leaves him as a major risk, as evidenced by his relationship with the Son of the former head of the London Station of the KGB |  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:58 - Jan 18 with 649 views | Buhrer |
Huzzah! The kingdom is saved. Let us dance in the streets. Red shall finally defeat Blue oh hallelujah.
What an empty puppets and smoke presentation of nothing. |  | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 15:04 - Jan 18 with 630 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:54 - Jan 18 by itfcjoe |
Corbyn's reaction to the Salisbury poisoning was pretty wild, and how would he have fared as PM when Putin was invading Ukraine when he has tended to take an anti-US (and by extension UK) to nearly every piece of foreign policy we can think of.
Boris did step up in the Ukraine war for them, but his loose morals and living style leaves him as a major risk, as evidenced by his relationship with the Son of the former head of the London Station of the KGB |
We already know his views on helping Ukraine.
|  |
| |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 15:08 - Jan 18 with 600 views | Buhrer |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 13:49 - Jan 18 by NthQldITFC |
I wonder what range of collapsed public services, infrastructure and fkcued up environment we'll have to get to before the majority of us accept that a "me first, low taxes" outlook is destroying us all?
Can people not see the state of the country they live in, the trajectory of decay and how the selfish, materialistic attitude of the majority spells doom - a society collapsing around our plastic castles? When you measure your worth primarily by money you utterly devalue your soul. |
 | | | |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 15:12 - Jan 18 with 583 views | blueasfook |
| Just the 27 point lead for Labour on 14:31 - Jan 18 by Herbivore |
If Johnson wasn't a security risk, why did Theresa May restrict his security clearance when he was Foreign Secretary? Why did he go against security advice to put the son of a Russian spy in the House of Lords? You seem happy to ignore people's actual actions in favour of relying on rhetoric that has been through various spin cycles in the right wing press, and much of it dating back a very long way. Do I think Johnson was a bigger security threat than Corbyn? Absolutely I do, and I've given you sound evidence for why I believe that. You have so far provided very little, aside from some historic things Corbyn said that there is no evidence would have ever been Labour policy under him.
Edit: Here's some further actual stuff Johnson did that made him a security risk: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mi5-boris-johnson-security-partyg [Post edited 18 Jan 14:33]
|
Well you're wrong. Quite simply.
Fortunately we only do have hypothetical evidence of what Corbyn would have done because he was universally rejected by the electorate. As Joe said, Boris is a bit of a loose cannon in terms of his lifestyle but in terms of his stance on British values and defence, he can't be questioned. On Ukraine for example, he immediately stepped up and provided support. Jezza's response? Sign a StopTheWar Coaliton letter blaming NATO expansion!
Just stop now. Bored. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
