By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
The one improvement Labour will bring is some decency and honesty back into government. Which has been severely lacking since Johnson took over.
They'll have a big enough majority that can't be overturned in one term, so we are looking at a minimum of ten years and if the economy is in decent shape they can do more in that second term.
We just need sensible and competent.
The conclusion I've come to is they can't be any worse. There's also a real point of principle to it all for me, and this Tory party simply has to be punished by way of a complete obliteration. If for no other reason as a warning and reminder that sub standard government, deceit and contempt for the electorate has consequences and isn't tolerable. They simply cannot be rewarded with another term.
As a LP member & Starmer supporter (I back the team no matter who manages it) I was disappointed & quite worried by last night, think complacency is a danger. It was like watching a team prepared by Paul Hirst vs. a dirty streetfighting one prepared by Neil Warnock.
Pointless complaining about the format, it's what *floating* voters, waverers, or politically homeless take away with them that matters - and what many in those categories will have as earworms now is that Labour would take £2K from them.
The old dirty tactic of repeating the same short phrase multiple times, however untrue it might be, is, sadly, a vote-winner. Starmer needed to arrow a refutation of it in every time it was parroted, in the first 10 secs before being interrupted, but failed to do so (resulting in me shouting at the TV!). He did apparently go on to it later, but by that point I'd had to leave the room for a few minutes, as I imagine plenty of others had done too, whether by necessity or choice.
I find it absolutely shocking that Labour don't yet have a Manifesto out - yes 4th July announcement was something of a surprise by the tories, but you'd have thought that a competent Labour organisation would have draft/s lined up near-ready to go. (The Tories do have one out - thankfully it's a pathetic epic fail). For those who want first sight - https://labour.org.uk/updates/stories/labour-manifesto-2024-sign-up/
I breathed a sigh of relief when the question on National Service came up last night, as the idea was met with derision & swung things back Starmer's way. He also gave a good answer to the ECHR question, which went down well with the audience.
Well I haven't voted for the Tories since 2017, cut up my membership card and wrote to Ruth Davidson after T May did a deal with the DUP, didn't vote in the 2019 general election as the choice was between a racist incompetent and an incompetent racist, voted Labour at the Scottish Parliamentary elections and voted Labour in the council elections. I have nothing but disgust for the current incarnation of the Tory party and want to see them absolutely obliterated next month but I am not a natural Labour voter, am uninspired by Starmer although I'm grateful to him for delousing the Labour party and kicking out Corbyn, disagree with some of his policies and am only lending them my vote until we have a centre right party that I can vote for in all conscience. So yeah, I'd call that pretty neutral.
We seem to do this dance in an annual basis Dollers. You start banging on about how I was supporting the Tories at the 2019 general election, I link the threads where I stated the exact opposite and the two threads where I resigned from the Tory party in 2017 and show that you actively replied to those threads at the time. You then say "well I can't be expected to remember every thread", eat sleep rave repeat. Shall I book you in to do this again next year?
[Post edited 5 Jun 2024 10:09]
Touched a nerve!
It's not about who you voted for last time. It's who you are. You're a Tory at heart, have been for most of your adult life I suspect. And therefore, not totally neutral. Given how vociferously you've defended them in the past, I can't believe you've completely changed now.
Your last sentence is wrong (not with you that you wrote it but the whole idea behind it). The parties should be out there telling us what they will do and how they will make a difference and improve people's lives.
Tbf, they are. Take a look at each of the websites for the Tories and Labour and they both outline their priorities. (Worryingly, they both have 5 point plans too!). I suspect the other parties are the same and the manifestos won’t be long coming. Other parties have probably been caught out a bit, so they’ll be scrabbling together their manifestos as we speak.
The conclusion I've come to is they can't be any worse. There's also a real point of principle to it all for me, and this Tory party simply has to be punished by way of a complete obliteration. If for no other reason as a warning and reminder that sub standard government, deceit and contempt for the electorate has consequences and isn't tolerable. They simply cannot be rewarded with another term.
It's almost like you stole the words directly from my brain! Completely agree with everything you said.
It's not about who you voted for last time. It's who you are. You're a Tory at heart, have been for most of your adult life I suspect. And therefore, not totally neutral. Given how vociferously you've defended them in the past, I can't believe you've completely changed now.
GB in natural Tory shocker!!!!! You got me there mate. What gave it away?
You really need to read what is written. There isn't a Tory party that I recognise to vote for and I'm reluctantly voting Labour. SoI'm completely neutral on this with zero tribal alliance.
It's not about who you voted for last time. It's who you are. You're a Tory at heart, have been for most of your adult life I suspect. And therefore, not totally neutral. Given how vociferously you've defended them in the past, I can't believe you've completely changed now.
To be fair people are allowed to change their minds once more information is available. Plus if any set of politicians could turn a true blue against them it's this latest version of the Tories.
I used to hate olives when I was younger, I then tried them again when I got in my 30s and now love them.
Absolute fury from the former Permanent Secretary to the Treasury on The World At One just now. He made it very clear that none of what Sunak said last night, and Claire Coutinho said this morning has any basis in truth.
I just hope Sunak has given Starmer sufficient rope with which to hang him at the next debate.
The conclusion I've come to is they can't be any worse. There's also a real point of principle to it all for me, and this Tory party simply has to be punished by way of a complete obliteration. If for no other reason as a warning and reminder that sub standard government, deceit and contempt for the electorate has consequences and isn't tolerable. They simply cannot be rewarded with another term.
Agree wholeheartedly. There simply has to be accountability for actions in the troubled and dangerously flammable world we're living in. Political consequences for a traditional party are significant, but what worries me is that along with the rest of modern life, politics can descend into an even more short-term, rebranded, commercially orientated TikTok sh!tfest as the world dies around us.
There also has to be meaningful personal accountability and no hiding behind cheating and manipulative lawyers. In short, there has to be honour. We're dead as a society and as a planet if we don't turn this round, and Starmer needs to be brave when he gets in and start pushing the tiller hard over.
As a LP member & Starmer supporter (I back the team no matter who manages it) I was disappointed & quite worried by last night, think complacency is a danger. It was like watching a team prepared by Paul Hirst vs. a dirty streetfighting one prepared by Neil Warnock.
Pointless complaining about the format, it's what *floating* voters, waverers, or politically homeless take away with them that matters - and what many in those categories will have as earworms now is that Labour would take £2K from them.
The old dirty tactic of repeating the same short phrase multiple times, however untrue it might be, is, sadly, a vote-winner. Starmer needed to arrow a refutation of it in every time it was parroted, in the first 10 secs before being interrupted, but failed to do so (resulting in me shouting at the TV!). He did apparently go on to it later, but by that point I'd had to leave the room for a few minutes, as I imagine plenty of others had done too, whether by necessity or choice.
I find it absolutely shocking that Labour don't yet have a Manifesto out - yes 4th July announcement was something of a surprise by the tories, but you'd have thought that a competent Labour organisation would have draft/s lined up near-ready to go. (The Tories do have one out - thankfully it's a pathetic epic fail). For those who want first sight - https://labour.org.uk/updates/stories/labour-manifesto-2024-sign-up/
I breathed a sigh of relief when the question on National Service came up last night, as the idea was met with derision & swung things back Starmer's way. He also gave a good answer to the ECHR question, which went down well with the audience.
This is the first time I actually feel my vote, and all votes are totally worthless. Of course they are not, but that is how it feels.
I have voted Tory on all occasions, all my life, but have already decided I am not voting for them at this GE. Apart from the complete mess they have made from short term fixes based upon self and party interests alone (not what is needed for the nation), but I have really grown to despise the one thing that made me vote for them in the past - ability to drive modernisation and economy growth. Instead what we have seen is privatisation drive profit for shareholders, the elimination of competition, or any desire or requirement to actually improve service.
The list is endless, but my #1 thing I despise; water companies, privatised, wracking up prices in the name of improving the system, instead paying shareholders and investing nothing in improving the system, polluting every UK water course in the process. Guess what, another 90% hike to improve the system. How is that allowed to happen! It's just plain wrong.
Now, I am likely to vote Labour, just on the basis that if they do nothing other than nationalise for non-for-profits services like water, energy, public transport, then it's a step in the right direction for me.
Do I actually think they will do it? Not a chance. As they say in war, plans never survive the first contact. So that's likely a wasted vote too. And then who else? We've only two electable parties, both of which are useless, when actually what we need is someone who actually has a plan, the determination and stubbornness, and sufficiently thick skin, to actually do something.
I wish we had a "none of the above" option, because I suspect that party would win by a landslide.
As a LP member & Starmer supporter (I back the team no matter who manages it) I was disappointed & quite worried by last night, think complacency is a danger. It was like watching a team prepared by Paul Hirst vs. a dirty streetfighting one prepared by Neil Warnock.
Pointless complaining about the format, it's what *floating* voters, waverers, or politically homeless take away with them that matters - and what many in those categories will have as earworms now is that Labour would take £2K from them.
The old dirty tactic of repeating the same short phrase multiple times, however untrue it might be, is, sadly, a vote-winner. Starmer needed to arrow a refutation of it in every time it was parroted, in the first 10 secs before being interrupted, but failed to do so (resulting in me shouting at the TV!). He did apparently go on to it later, but by that point I'd had to leave the room for a few minutes, as I imagine plenty of others had done too, whether by necessity or choice.
I find it absolutely shocking that Labour don't yet have a Manifesto out - yes 4th July announcement was something of a surprise by the tories, but you'd have thought that a competent Labour organisation would have draft/s lined up near-ready to go. (The Tories do have one out - thankfully it's a pathetic epic fail). For those who want first sight - https://labour.org.uk/updates/stories/labour-manifesto-2024-sign-up/
I breathed a sigh of relief when the question on National Service came up last night, as the idea was met with derision & swung things back Starmer's way. He also gave a good answer to the ECHR question, which went down well with the audience.
The flip side of the whole £2k thing, is that by not immediately responding is that Labour can now (with some justification by the looks of it) claim that Sunak repeatedly lied to the nation. And this despite being warned by the Treasury earlier in the week.
I’m not sure how the two of those will play out. What’s likely to stick more - probable lies about Labour’s tax plans or being able to highlight the stories as liars. The truth element must be a weak spot for the Tories given their poor record around being truthful.
Maybe this is the plan. Maybe not and Starmer’s just pants at thinking on his feet. Who knows 🤷♂️
The conclusion I've come to is they can't be any worse. There's also a real point of principle to it all for me, and this Tory party simply has to be punished by way of a complete obliteration. If for no other reason as a warning and reminder that sub standard government, deceit and contempt for the electorate has consequences and isn't tolerable. They simply cannot be rewarded with another term.
100% this. The Tories can’t be rewards for the last 14 years of catastrophic mismanagement. By pretty much every metric, everything’s worse or on its knees. Economy, NHS, schools, our council services, universities, the environment, poverty, the list goes on.
Labour have already shown they’re better simply by not constantly playing childish culture war games. The Tories’ grand plan for the NHS today? Ban nurses from wearing Palestinian badges. Genius, I’m sure that’ll get the waiting lists down
Whether Labour are going to be able to sort everything out or do everything everyone wants of them is another question. But they won’t be worse.
The flip side of the whole £2k thing, is that by not immediately responding is that Labour can now (with some justification by the looks of it) claim that Sunak repeatedly lied to the nation. And this despite being warned by the Treasury earlier in the week.
I’m not sure how the two of those will play out. What’s likely to stick more - probable lies about Labour’s tax plans or being able to highlight the stories as liars. The truth element must be a weak spot for the Tories given their poor record around being truthful.
Maybe this is the plan. Maybe not and Starmer’s just pants at thinking on his feet. Who knows 🤷♂️
They probably won't dare to say it, but there must be many of us who'd be perfectly willing to have another 1 or even 2p put on income tax if it meant an improvement in services, and it'd be the cheaper option in many cases.
I've had to shell out over £1K for basic dentistry at a private practice so far this year alone, because there's no place at a NHS practice within 20 miles.
I don't really comment on political things but Neither of them are worth voting for Sunak has had time to show what he can do and hasn't and Starmer literally doesn't have an answer to anything for example: "we'd sort the doctors strikes but we won't pay 35%" ... "OK how would you do it then ?" "we'd get around the table and talk to them" "We've been doing that for 18 months they're holding out for 35%" "yeah well i'd sort it out" "HOW ?"
AND ....
"how would you stop the boats" "i'd focus on stopping the gangs" "OK thats great but what about the ones that already here ?" "Rwanda won't work" "well if Rwanda won't work ... what are you going to do about the illegal migrants that are here ?" "we're going to stop the gangs" "you already said that, if Rwanda won't work what are you going to do with all the migrants that are already here sitting in hotels ?" "i'd process their applications quickly" "Fine, but they won't all be accepted so what about the onbes who are rejected how are you getting them out ?" "Rwanda is a gimmick and it won't work" AAAAARRRRRGGHHHHHHHHHH
Starmer will win because the Tories are awful, not because he offers anything at all - he doesn't seem to actually know how he will achieve anything and people will just vote him in becasue they want him to be better .... will he be ?
It was 51/49 in favour of Sunak. When you consider how far behind Starmer he is in the polls and a lot of peoples confirmation bias, I'd say it was a far better lead than the poll showed.
The debates won't win the election and I get Starmer's strategy but he came across as very dull and evasive whereas Sunak had some piss and vinegar about him.
I thought Sunak just came across as rude... and increasingly desperate. Starmer started off ruffled but grew and essentially just came across as more polite/decent.
GB in natural Tory shocker!!!!! You got me there mate. What gave it away?
You really need to read what is written. There isn't a Tory party that I recognise to vote for and I'm reluctantly voting Labour. SoI'm completely neutral on this with zero tribal alliance.
I agree on most of this, other than the very last bit. How can you be completely neutral when you're a "natural Tory" and "reluctantly voting Labour"? This is my point. A completely neutral person wouldn't favour either side.
I don't really comment on political things but Neither of them are worth voting for Sunak has had time to show what he can do and hasn't and Starmer literally doesn't have an answer to anything for example: "we'd sort the doctors strikes but we won't pay 35%" ... "OK how would you do it then ?" "we'd get around the table and talk to them" "We've been doing that for 18 months they're holding out for 35%" "yeah well i'd sort it out" "HOW ?"
AND ....
"how would you stop the boats" "i'd focus on stopping the gangs" "OK thats great but what about the ones that already here ?" "Rwanda won't work" "well if Rwanda won't work ... what are you going to do about the illegal migrants that are here ?" "we're going to stop the gangs" "you already said that, if Rwanda won't work what are you going to do with all the migrants that are already here sitting in hotels ?" "i'd process their applications quickly" "Fine, but they won't all be accepted so what about the onbes who are rejected how are you getting them out ?" "Rwanda is a gimmick and it won't work" AAAAARRRRRGGHHHHHHHHHH
Starmer will win because the Tories are awful, not because he offers anything at all - he doesn't seem to actually know how he will achieve anything and people will just vote him in becasue they want him to be better .... will he be ?
You've fallen for the Tory rhetoric.
Starmer's right, getting round the table and debating IS the answer. The Tories just get around a table and don't budge. The only alternatives to getting round the table are doing nothing and accepting the 35%. What do you want him to say?
And stopping the gangs IS a legitimate way to stop the boats. "What about the ones that already here?" - they've already used the boats, so that's a different question to "how would you stop the boats?"
I thought Sunak just came across as rude... and increasingly desperate. Starmer started off ruffled but grew and essentially just came across as more polite/decent.
Hmm..I am undoubtedly biased as I've never voted Labour in my life, but I though Starmer came across as very wooden & reluctant to commit to anything. I believe the consensus is that Sunak got the better of it, but I doubt it will make a huge difference. He's clearly going to keep banging on about Labour increasing taxes by £2k per person, irrespective of how much of that is conjecture, but it is a way of frightening people who are considering voting Labour. The reality is neither of them are being honest about what might need to be done if Britain is going to spend more on the NHS, long term care, Defence (which Sunak is making an issue of).
Starmer's right, getting round the table and debating IS the answer. The Tories just get around a table and don't budge. The only alternatives to getting round the table are doing nothing and accepting the 35%. What do you want him to say?
And stopping the gangs IS a legitimate way to stop the boats. "What about the ones that already here?" - they've already used the boats, so that's a different question to "how would you stop the boats?"
You've fallen for the Labour rhetoric, "anybody but the Tories". Labour if they say little will get into power easily, it's clear they are choosing to no commit to much so it doesn't come back to bite them when they can't implement it for whatever reason.
I saw it differently, Starmer when pressed didn't have any opinions and would basically do what the current lot do I don't believe that the Tories wouldn't budge, they just won't go to 35%. The boat issue was just a repeating what the Tories have said they are trying to do, is smash the gangs
Maybe I am being optimistic but I want to know what actions a new government would implement to make a difference, I am just not getting that from Labour at the moment. Hope it changes as I really want a government who actually helps the country and no just carry on with the same policies
Yes and milk still appears on the door step in glass bottles, if you are willing to pay a little more. Mind you not every morning, been just 3 days a week for sometime.
I agree on most of this, other than the very last bit. How can you be completely neutral when you're a "natural Tory" and "reluctantly voting Labour"? This is my point. A completely neutral person wouldn't favour either side.
I agree FWIW. Coldness towards both isn't really equivalent to impartiality. Feeling bereft of a natural political home at the moment isn't akin to being apolitical. This doesn't dilute the validity of GB's contributions or my interest in reading them, but it's difficult for anyone to free themselves of all political biases and pre-formed opinions, even moreso when someone is as politically engaged as he is. I don't think he's being disingenuous though (say by claiming neutrality in an attempt to be more persuasive).
Hmm..I am undoubtedly biased as I've never voted Labour in my life, but I though Starmer came across as very wooden & reluctant to commit to anything. I believe the consensus is that Sunak got the better of it, but I doubt it will make a huge difference. He's clearly going to keep banging on about Labour increasing taxes by £2k per person, irrespective of how much of that is conjecture, but it is a way of frightening people who are considering voting Labour. The reality is neither of them are being honest about what might need to be done if Britain is going to spend more on the NHS, long term care, Defence (which Sunak is making an issue of).
I see the Spectator has just said that using the same assumptions as Sunak, the Tory plans require taxes to increase by £3000.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
