Do you want to discuss boring politics? (13 Viewers)

PVA said:

I know that winning votes and winning elections does seem very far fetched and conspiracy theory-esque to Corbynites such as yourself.

Click to expand...

Which bit is a conspiracy theory?

Starmer shifting the party substantially to the right?

Starmer abandoning the pledges he made when elected leader, and many since?

Elphicke, as far as I can see, hasn't apologised for anything she's said in the past about the Labour party or its policies, or indeed anything else (be that either casually offensive or just plain stupid), but is allowed to become a member and an MP.

Abbot, who swiftly apologised when challenged about the content of a single letter to the Guardian, is still suspended from the party.

Which bit here isn't factual?

David O'Day said:

Moving away from the 6th form debate

This made me chuckle

Click to expand...

You're right, that's way below sixth form debate. More like year seven. I'm sure it's quite funny though.

PVA said:

I don't like her or what she stands for any more than you do, but if it results in a net gain of votes/rating then yes that is quite literally good politics.

Click to expand...

It might, or might not, marginally get a few more votes for Starmer's version of the Labour party.

Whether that's literally good for politics overall, now that's a whole different question...

David O'Day said:

what is the point of politics if you can't win

you can't change anything if the public will not vote for you

Click to expand...

Exactly.

I mean we're still enjoying the spoils of Michael Foots policies all these years lat......waaaait a minute

For fuck sake.

PVA said:

So what would you rather?

- give Starmer a chance to make change (whether you think he actually will or not)
- four more years of Sunak and Co

Like it or not that's your two choices.

Click to expand...

If truth be told I’d be most happy where Starmer does not get an outright majority but is the largest party. That way for him to lead he might have to compromise with people that have actual policies and principles.

Ian1779 said:

If truth be told I’d be most happy where Starmer does not get an outright majority but is the largest party. That way for him to lead he might have to compromise with people that have actual policies and principles.

Click to expand...

He’d have to coalition with the SNP. Can’t abide that

Brighton Sky Blue said:

He’d have to coalition with the SNP. Can’t abide that

Click to expand...

Better that than Starmer going full Farage.

Ian1779 said:

Better that than Starmer going full Farage.

Click to expand...

Nah. They'll demand an indyref as the condition for helping out.

Hopefully Yoga Master Ed gets enough seats instead for this scenario to work.

Brighton Sky Blue said:

Nah. They'll demand an indyref as the condition for helping out.

Hopefully Yoga Master Ed gets enough seats instead for this scenario to work.

Click to expand...

I’m hoping for the Star Wars inspired ‘Rise of the Independents’

Sick Boy said:

Yeah it’ll appeal to those who’ve voted Tory in the past rather than traditional Labour voters.

Click to expand...

There aren’t enough traditional Labour voters to win an election. By definition if you want to win an election you will need to convince people who voted Tory in the past, considering they’ve been in power for the vast majority of modern history.

duffer said:

It might, or might not, marginally get a few more votes for Starmer's version of the Labour party.

Whether that's literally good for politics overall, now that's a whole different question...

Click to expand...

it's good politics for labour then as in the end if you don't win you don't get to implement anything

shmmeee said:

There aren’t enough traditional Labour voters to win an election. By definition if you want to win an election you will need to convince people who voted Tory in the past, considering they’ve been in power for the vast majority of modern history.

Click to expand...

And by definition the Tories need to convince people who voted Labour in the past, but don't seem to have to make compromises to anywhere near the same extent.

shmmeee said:

There aren’t enough traditional Labour voters to win an election. By definition if you want to win an election you will need to convince people who voted Tory in the past, considering they’ve been in power for the vast majority of modern history.

Click to expand...

Standard right-wing Labour nonsense to justify the move to being just another Tory party

Ian1779 said:

If truth be told I’d be most happy where Starmer does not get an outright majority but is the largest party. That way for him to lead he might have to compromise with people that have actual policies and principles.

Click to expand...

That wasn't an option

More good news for the Tory Labour boys -

Philosorapter said:

Standard right-wing Labour nonsense to justify the move to being just another Tory party

Click to expand...

If the Labour Party are just the Tories in disguise then why is the biggest Tory/most vocal anti Labour poster so upset with them?

I thought he'd be absolutely falling over himself to vote for another four years of Tories and yet he despises Starmer.

PVA said:

If the Labour Party are just the Tories in disguise then why is the biggest Tory/most vocal anti Labour poster so upset with them?

I thought he'd be absolutely falling over himself to vote for another four years of Tories and yet he despises Starmer.

Click to expand...

Because the Overton window keeps moving right.

shmmeee said:

you will need to convince people who voted Tory in the past

Click to expand...

Might be an idea to also convince people that have voted Labour in the past

Love how quickly we've gone from tearing into political commentators and labelling them clueless for suggesting after the locals there was even a remote change of Labour not winning a majority to Starmer had to welcome a right wing tory into the party or he might not win

chiefdave said:

Love how quickly we've gone from tearing into political commentators and labelling them clueless for suggesting after the locals there was even a remote change of Labour not winning a majority to Starmer had to welcome a right wing tory into the party or he might not win

Click to expand...

I could forgive him for welcoming a right wing tory, but the rape case shenanigans, not a fucking chance.

For me it’s the final nail in the coffin not to even bother voting. Starmer has zero principles and unsurprising it’s the Tory voters advocating bringing in Conservative MPs.

Sick Boy said:

For me it’s the final nail in the coffin not to even bother voting. Starmer has zero principles.

Click to expand...

Fuck you, and fuck the horse you rode in on.

People literally died for the right to exercise their franchise, and there you are, pontificating from your plush home that you know better than the men and women who fought for your right to participate in a democracy.

Fuck off!

JAM See said:

Fuck you, and fuck the horse you rode in on.

People literally died for the right to exercise their franchise, and there you are, pontificating from your plush home that you know better than the men and women who fought for your right to participate in a democracy.

Fuck off!

Click to expand...

There’s no chance I’d vote for Labour now, so it’d likely be Green. Living abroad it’s an extra hassle but more of a reflection of the choices available that I won’t bother.

JAM See said:

Fuck you, and fuck the horse you rode in on.

People literally died for the right to exercise their franchise, and there you are, pontificating from your plush home that you know better than the men and women who fought for your right to participate in a democracy.

Fuck off!

Click to expand...

Overreaction much.

Luckily we live in a free society where people can participate or not depending on their conscience.

Liquid Gold said:

Overreaction much.

Luckily we live in a free society where people can participate or not depending on their conscience.

Click to expand...

Though the powers that be seem more focused on finding ways to exclude people from exercising that right than getting them to participate.

Liquid Gold said:

Overreaction much.

Luckily we live in a free society where people can participate or not depending on their conscience.

Click to expand...

Compulsory voting and PR.

We are obliged to pay tax, observe speed limits etc.

We should be obliged to participate in choosing who decides the big stuff too.

Not voting is NOT a rational choice.
Not voting is the act of a coward, a coward who can point the finger at everyone else and smugly say " not in my name"

Non voters are wankers.

JAM See said:

Compulsory voting and PR.

We are obliged to pay tax, observe speed limits etc.

We should be obliged to participate in choosing who decides the big stuff too.

Not voting is NOT a rational choice.
Not voting is the act of a coward, a coward who can point the finger at everyone else and smugly say " not in my name"

Non voters are wankers.

Click to expand...

The state should do everything it can to make it as easy as possible for someone to vote shy of making it mandatory. Automatic registration, if voter ID is to be insisted on (and it shouldn't be), then offer it for free.

JAM See said:

Compulsory voting and PR.

We are obliged to pay tax, observe speed limits etc.

We should be obliged to participate in choosing who decides the big stuff too.

Not voting is NOT a rational choice.
Not voting is the act of a coward, a coward who can point the finger at everyone else and smugly say " not in my name"

Non voters are wankers.

Click to expand...

It wasn’t until recently people like me were encouraged to vote. I’d rather have a vote in the country I actually pay tax in than vote for Tory or Tory lite, thanks.

JAM See said:

Compulsory voting and PR.

We are obliged to pay tax, observe speed limits etc.

We should be obliged to participate in choosing who decides the big stuff too.

Not voting is NOT a rational choice.
Not voting is the act of a coward, a coward who can point the finger at everyone else and smugly say " not in my name"

Non voters are wankers.

Click to expand...

Forcing somebody to vote for the least worst option is not democracy

Labour has changed says Natalie Elphick, who, amongst her reasons for resigning, said Sunak had "failed to stop the boats". By that rationale I'm surprised she didn't join Reform.

Liquid Gold said:

Overreaction much.

Luckily we live in a free society where people can participate or not depending on their conscience.

Click to expand...

It's already pretty much a managed democracy without mandatory voting. Can you imagine what it would be like if given a veneer of credibility by having people forced to vote for any of the utter fucking cunts seeking election?

fernandopartridge said:

It's already pretty much a managed democracy without mandatory voting. Can you imagine what it would be like if given a veneer of credibility by having people forced to vote for any of the utter fucking cunts seeking election?

Click to expand...

I used to think it was a good idea but I don't see what value is added by forcing millions of disinterested or ill informed people into the ballot box.

Liquid Gold said:

Might be an idea to also convince people that have voted Labour in the past

Click to expand...

And they are. Hence the polls.

Brighton Sky Blue said:

And by definition the Tories need to convince people who voted Labour in the past, but don't seem to have to make compromises to anywhere near the same extent.

Click to expand...

We’ve had this discussion before, but the Tories made all kinds of compromises to woo Labour voters, it just didn’t bite them in the arse with their base until the (extremely popular) leader who made them was forced out.