Do you want to discuss boring politics? (138 Viewers)

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
I didn’t say he did.

Still I guess poor Sir Smarmer (shamefully borrowed) rubbing shoulders with posh alumni shaped him to the man he is

One who laughs at strikers who live in some place called Coventry
And comparing this negatively from the twat in charge who said there were no parties, then he didn’t attend one then sacking people who had been to them and then received a penalty notice for attending one. Certainly parody isn’t it
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
So you didn't say this?



Wait. You're not going to say that by saying his father paid the fees you actually haven't said that Starmer paid fees... Are you? Desperate stuff if so.

Well you referred to his father as a toolmaker which wasn’t true (see below)

When mr Starmer was asked been very coy especially regarding the last two years of his education and if that was paying or not. This is nothing new of labour leaders either. Ed Milliband often bragged his millionaire parents sent him to a local como but like Starmer became very evasive when asked about stories he had a very expensive personal tutor

In fact he like certain other Labour Party members of prominence even tried at one point to deny he’s been to a selective grammar school (turned private in year 3) and tried initially to say he was in a state school (he wasn’t)

my real falsehood was labelling Starmers father a toolmaker (which I believe you claimed) - which is it seems not strictly true either - he owned a tooling company not the image of an actual toolmaker working in a factory that Starmer tries to create for some reason
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Was the 2017 Conservative manifesto popular?

Only geeks read manifestos - it’s the person at the top and the relevant figures around them that people vote for abs try and connect to

It’s a general feeling and people engage in politics only once every 5 years

Starmer isn’t relatable to anyone. Why he has to pretend to be working class (well yes Sir Keir everyone has your privilege in life) I’ve no idea as it’s preposterous

The real funny one which no one mentions is Rachel reeves - she really is in the wrong party
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
A party that managed to convince the populous that Jacob Rees-Mogg is a ‘man of the people’ has no intention of doing anything other than conning people - but somehow it works.
Not disagreeing with that, but would you say it's 'earning' votes?

Would you prefer Labour to make promises they have no intention of keeping and resorting to vacuous three word slogans just to get into power?
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Not sure why that’s important. Surely policy is key.
It should be, but reality sadly suggests it's not. Look at the last election - Tory manifesto was practically empty apart from 'Get Brexit Done' (with no detail as to how to do it) and they got a landslide.

If anything vague policy wins because you can let people decide to let it mean what you what it to mean. Brexit is a prime example. What Brexit actually meant was never truly defined, so different people voted for it for different reasons, even those some of those would have been in complete contrast.

Let's say you ran on the election pledge of 'lower taxes'. Vote winner by and large. But add the detail into that with things such as reduced services and public spending and some people will be turned off. Keep it vague and open.

We're very much in the realm of personality politics, not policy.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Im not. He benefitted from selective private education. Doubt he’s be there if he was in a secondary modern / comp dump would you?

John McDonnell never paid for his £36,000 a year boarding school either
The thing with selective education is the fact that it has historically been divided into those that do well academically and therefore will be successful, and those who do not and won't be.

If you changed the narrative as being selective to make the most of a child's attributes, instead of throwing the 'thickies' on the scrap heap, it would be acceptable. Just because someone isn't academically minded as a child doesn't mean they're worth less than those who are. If they're not 'clever' then make the most of what they are good at and give them the opportunity to be successful using that.

But having said that I still think it's good to have schools filled with people from all walks of life as it gives you a more rounded understanding of society in general. The likes of Cameron, Osbourne, Johnson, Rees-Mogg etc. have no clue at all, and Starmer fits into that category because he didn't spend much of his formative years with people different to himself and although I'm certain he listens to the perspective of those that were it doesn't help him when interacting with the general public.

Basically, all other things being equal I think you'd get a much better idea of understanding the needs of society from someone from a comprehensive background because they will have experienced a far greater range of people within society. Or someone that has worked at the front line of public services compared to someone who's spent their career in the City.
 

Northants Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
The current Tories are a wildly disparate coalition of UKIP, One Nation, Libertarian + oddballs like Fabricant etc.
BUT they'll all coalesce at election time to squeeze 40% of the vote to Get.Into.Power.Again. And again. And again...

Liberal/progressives are by nature more idealistic so less willing to compromise and subsequently get completely distracted by a `who's the most worthy' pissing contest.

Its the 80s all over and we cant change a thing in this country sat on the opposition benches arguing amongst ourselves
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
Not disagreeing with that, but would you say it's 'earning' votes?

Would you prefer Labour to make promises they have no intention of keeping and resorting to vacuous three word slogans just to get into power?
If it’s not earning votes then maybe the notion of showing people that what you have to offer is worth you voting for them.

I don’t think it’s the issue of Labour offering false promises or 3 word slogans… it’s that they are offering absolutely nothing. We are in the midst of a cost of living crisis and they appear to have not to say or offer on the matter.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
If it’s not earning votes then maybe the notion of showing people that what you have to offer is worth you voting for them.

I don’t think it’s the issue of Labour offering false promises or 3 word slogans… it’s that they are offering absolutely nothing. We are in the midst of a cost of living crisis and they appear to have not to say or offer on the matter.
3 word slogans
Let’s move on
Anyone but corbyn
Brexit brexit brexit
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
If it’s not earning votes then maybe the notion of showing people that what you have to offer is worth you voting for them.

I don’t think it’s the issue of Labour offering false promises or 3 word slogans… it’s that they are offering absolutely nothing. We are in the midst of a cost of living crisis and they appear to have not to say or offer on the matter.
Maybe they aren't offering as much about dealing with the crisis. But even the things they do suggest won't happen because they aren't in power, and often certain policies will only work when linked to others so unless they hve control of budgets etc decent suggestions would fail and thus be smeared for the future.

On the other hand, what are the alternative to that (the Tories) offering? They're creating this mess and their policies are making it worse. So if that's what I'm going to get instead, I'd still rather let Labour have a go even if I'm not entirely happy with that.

It's quite simple. If you let these things stop you voting for a flawed Labour you'll end up with the even more flawed Tories. And that's far, far worse.
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
Maybe they aren't offering as much about dealing with the crisis. But even the things they do suggest won't happen because they aren't in power, and often certain policies will only work when linked to others so unless they hve control of budgets etc decent suggestions would fail and thus be smeared for the future.

On the other hand, what are the alternative to that (the Tories) offering? They're creating this mess and their policies are making it worse. So if that's what I'm going to get instead, I'd still rather let Labour have a go even if I'm not entirely happy with that.

It's quite simple. If you let these things stop you voting for a flawed Labour you'll end up with the even more flawed Tories. And that's far, far worse.
It’s not my vote that needs to be won, despite my overwhelming reservation about Starmer, Reeves and the direction he is going - when push comes to shove that’s where it will probably go.
But if you’re someone who doesn’t engage in voting, or voted Tory in 2019 because you believed respecting the referendum was the right thing to do, what is it that the Labour Party have to offer that will make you engage or switch vote?
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
It’s not my vote that needs to be won, despite my overwhelming reservation about Starmer, Reeves and the direction he is going - when push comes to shove that’s where it will probably go.
But if you’re someone who doesn’t engage in voting, or voted Tory in 2019 because you believed respecting the referendum was the right thing to do, what is it that the Labour Party have to offer that will make you engage or switch vote?
Many many many reasons not to stay with a Tory vote surely
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Hopefully Dim will lose his seat at the next election. He’s been turning it into a Lib Dem seat as long as he’s sat in it. Only just got elected in 2019. Struggle to see how he’ll survive the next GE.

I doubt he'll be in the hotseat come the next election.
I think he's only there now due to lack of a suitable replacement.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
It’s not my vote that needs to be won, despite my overwhelming reservation about Starmer, Reeves and the direction he is going - when push comes to shove that’s where it will probably go.
But if you’re someone who doesn’t engage in voting, or voted Tory in 2019 because you believed respecting the referendum was the right thing to do, what is it that the Labour Party have to offer that will make you engage or switch vote?
But there will be plenty like you who aren't totally happy with the current leadership and will say exactly the same. "It's not about me, it's about convincing those that aren't traditional Labour supporters" Those individuals soon add up.

If you look at much of the polling, it's just as much a problem getting those that say they support Labour policies to actually vote. The general public that tend to vote for the Tories tend to go out of their way to ensure the get their vote cast, whereas those more likely to vote Labour (and the left in general) aren't as bothered.

As has been mentioned, that may be because the left is far more ideological and fractured, making it seem less imperative, when the result of that is ending up with something far worse than the less than ideal policies they vaguely agree with.

As for engaging the less interested, in that case Tory playbook of slogans and simple, vague policy outlines that would seem to agree with most people in some form. i.e. better immigration policy, increased public spending, higher taxes on the rich. Will appeal to many, yet the actual thing all those people want will be vastly different.
 

David O'Day

Well-Known Member
So you didn't say this?



Wait. You're not going to say that by saying his father paid the fees you actually haven't said that Starmer paid fees... Are you? Desperate stuff if so.

Seems he was exempt from paying fees, likely because he was already a pupil when it converted from a !!+ Grammar to a fee paying school


1651058350298.png
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Seems he was exempt from paying fees, likely because he was already a pupil when it converted from a !!+ Grammar to a fee paying school


View attachment 24495

Yep Grendel just made a total tit of himself over it. Got it wrong, doubled down on it, then denied he said it, then said something about John McDonnell to deflect.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Usual line about 'under Labour we'd still be in lockdown' and then something about a communist energy plan in Nottingham.

Pathetic stuff as per.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top