Do you want to discuss boring politics? (120 Viewers)

[David O'Day]

Who is this appealing to?

Labour urges spending watchdog to assess impact of chancellor’s £21bn package

Shadow Treasury secretary asks Office for Budget Responsibility to examine Rishi Sunak’s emergency cost of living measures

www.theguardian.com

the majority of people who saw labour as economically responsible, it's why labour now poll as better on the economy than the tories

 

---

[Ian1779]

the majority of people who saw labour as economically responsible, it's why labour now poll as better on the economy than the tories

Whether that is true or not… doesn’t detract from the fact in this context and situation it’s a fucking stupid thing to say out loud.

 

[David O'Day]

Whether that is true or not… doesn’t detract from the fact in this context and situation it’s a fucking stupid thing to say out loud.

no it's really not, most do not give a fuck and to others it shows fiscal responsibility

also fp in his rush to hate on labour has only read the headline

labour still support the measures, they are just saying as it was a budget sized package the obr should asses the effects like it would a budget

 

[CCFCSteve]

the majority of people who saw labour as economically responsible, it's why labour now poll as better on the economy than the tories

This is correct, however, I can’t help but feel they’re picking the wrong battle (again).

People also want ideas and how life would be better under Labour but guessing they’re holding off until nearer election, which is fair enough, especially when the government is potentially unravelling

 

[Ian1779]

no it's really not, most do not give a fuck and to others it shows fiscal responsibility

also fp in his rush to hate on labour has only read the headline

labour still support the measures, they are just saying as it was a budget sized package the obr should asses the effects like it would a budget

I’ve read the article - and she puts far more emphasis on ‘making sure it can be paid for’ than the desperate need for it in the first place.

If Labour think this is an election winning strategy then they are even more stupid than I thought possible.
Offer some fucking hope - not shitty middle management.

 

[fernandopartridge]

no it's really not, most do not give a fuck and to others it shows fiscal responsibility

also fp in his rush to hate on labour has only read the headline

labour still support the measures, they are just saying as it was a budget sized package the obr should asses the effects like it would a budget

I've read the story you clown

 

[David O'Day]

I've read the story you clown

I did you did fucking idiot, you should try and read the story first and not the headline

It still clearly says Labour supports the measures but thinks due to the size of the package the OBR should look at measures.

It's right there in the story but in your rather sad attempts to attack anything that might have something to to do with Rachel Reeves you didn't read the story and made yourself look a c**t.

You clown

 

[David O'Day]

I’ve read the article - and she puts far more emphasis on ‘making sure it can be paid for’ than the desperate need for it in the first place.

If Labour think this is an election winning strategy then they are even more stupid than I thought possible.
Offer some fucking hope - not shitty middle management.

You really haven't read the article if you think "she"

It's Pat McFadden who is the one quoted in the article.

It also clearly states they support the measures

 

[fernandopartridge]

I did you did fucking idiot, you should try and read the story first and not the headline

It still clearly says Labour supports the measures but thinks due to the size of the package the OBR should look at measures.

It's right there in the story but in your rather sad attempts to attack anything that might have something to to do with Rachel Reeves you didn't read the story and made yourself look a c**t.

You clown

Who is it appealing to?

 

[Ian1779]

You really haven't read the article if you think "she"

It's Pat McFadden who is the one quoted in the article.

It also clearly states they support the measures

In my defence I followed the link direct from her Twitter. These are her words still.

 

[David O'Day]

Who is it appealing to?

the people who used to think labour was wasteful economically that's all.

most people either will never know about or simply don't care

you are acting like the are attacking the measures and don't support them

but in the end most don't really care

 

[David O'Day]

In my defence I followed the link direct from her Twitter. These are her words still.

and you really have to be looking for offence there

 

[David O'Day]

in the end it is a tiny story most people will never even see and all it is saying is "yes we support the recently announced packages but in a time of very high inflation should we also not know what if any the inflationary effects of the measures maybe"

It's a non story really

 

[Ian1779]

and you really have to be looking for offence there

No not offence - any person with the slightest bit of political acumen would have said in the second sentence of that tweet ‘Labour will do even more to support you in your times of struggle’

It’s utterly clueless dirge.

 

[shmmeee]

Who is it appealing to?

The vast swathe of voters who still rate the Tories higher for handling the economy and bringing down debt.

People know Labour will look after those worse off, it’s priced in, but they’re still behind on spending and tied on managing the economy generally because that’s the pre-existing view of Labour:



Reeves is there to counter that narrative, especially now when the economy is by far and away the biggest voter concern.

 

[fernandopartridge]

The economy is now just what? the deficit?

 

[David O'Day]

No not offence - any person with the slightest bit of political acumen would have said in the second sentence of that tweet ‘Labour will do even more to support you in your times of struggle’

It’s utterly clueless dirge.

So clueless that under Reeves Labour has gone from being seen as weak and wasteful on the economy to stronger than the tories.

It's perfectly reasonable to have an economic assessment of big ticket economic packages.

No one wants to stop the measures but they could be inflationary so why shouldn't the OBR be asked to look at what those effects maybe so we have some advanced warning. This is what happens happens with budgets and Autumn statements. This is what the OBR is designed for so why not use it. The story is being spun on here to read "Labour want to get rid of the measures"

Sorry but most people don't care or would even see the story at all.

 

[Ian1779]

So clueless that under Reeves Labour has gone from being seen as weak and wasteful on the economy to stronger than the tories.

It's perfectly reasonable to have an economic assessment of big ticket economic packages.

No one wants to stop the measures but they could be inflationary so why shouldn't the OBR be asked to look at what those effects maybe so we have some advanced warning. This is what happens happens with budgets and Autumn statements. This is what the OBR is designed for so why not use it. The story is being spun on here to read "Labour want to get rid of the measures"

Sorry but most people don't care or would even see the story at all.

Thats bollocks - it’s not being spun on here like at all, it’s the complete opposite because Labour should be suggesting MORE.

Your big argument is it looks good in a survey… wow.

They’re going big on channeling their inner 2010-15… sure that will play out well.

 

[shmmeee]

The economy is now just what? the deficit?

No, that’s why there’s 6 other graphs there. But the deficit is the only one the Tories have a significant lead on.

You may not like it but there’s a huge group of middle ground voters who care about “balancing the books”, and Labour need to win them over. Last time we won government it came with a promise to follow Tory spending plans. Then we managed to stay there for 13 years and massively improve spending in a host of areas (while also running surpluses and reducing debt to GDP).

Labour have certain weak points in public perception, the biggest being spending, followed by “gives money to scroungers” and defence. Any attempt to win has to tackle those head on, no matter how uncomfortable it makes the base.

 

[David O'Day]

The economy is now just what? the deficit?

No, I was quite clearly talking about the publics views on which party is better on the economy. This is shown by the last few months of polling.

This is something a) the tories can no longer attack labour on b) something the public do take into account when voting.

In the end all what has happened is Labour have asked the OBR to look at the inflationary effects of a big ticket economic package. A package it says it supports

 

[Ian1779]

No, I was quite clearly talking about the publics views on which party is better on the economy. This is shown by the last few months of polling.

This is something a) the tories can no longer attack labour on b) something the public do take into account when voting.

In the end all what has happened is Labour have asked the OBR to look at the inflationary effects of a big ticket economic package. A package it says it supports

Did Labour do the same with the Ukraine war spend or does that not count because it plays well in the focus groups?

 

[David O'Day]

Thats bollocks - it’s not being spun on here like at all, it’s the complete opposite because Labour should be suggesting MORE.

Your big argument is it looks good in a survey… wow.

They’re going big on chaneling their inner 2010-15… sure that will play out well.

No that is how it is being spun on here.

No my big argument is that for once the public actually trust Labour on the economy.

I'm sure chaneling our inner 2019 would be great - that was a Tory party that could attack labour which "how are you going to pay for that?"

So thanks for proving my point

 

[David O'Day]

Did Labour do the same with the Ukraine war spend or does that not count because it plays well in the focus groups?

We've promised the Ukraine about 1.3 billion in aid where as the measures we are talking about are about 29 billion

The focus group line is nonsense as well as they both play well in them

It's the size, Ian it's sensible to know what the inflationary effects may be. Labour aren't asking for them to be stopped.

 

[Grendel]

The hard man IRA supporter has emerged from under the bed.

the people who used to think labour was wasteful economically that's all.

most people either will never know about or simply don't care

you are acting like the are attacking the measures and don't support them

but in the end most don't really care

lol Labour trying to focus on economic strength and concern on lending is a total vote loser

Sorry chaps trust us those silly tories are spending too much on the poor

Great messaging

 

[David O'Day]

In the end all Labour want is the OBR to do what the OBR is set up for and look at the inflationary effects of the policy.

They support the policy, it was their policy for 5 months before the tories u-turned.

most people will never see the story

end of really

 

[Ian1779]

No that is how it is being spun on here.

No my big argument is that for once the public actually trust Labour on the economy.

I'm sure chaneling our inner 2019 would be great - that was a Tory party that could attack labour which "how are you going to pay for that?"

So thanks for proving my point

You think that ‘trust’ will hold? Labour is only holding onto polling leads because the Tory vote had gone into hiding until Johnson goes.
Once he’s despatched and he’s taken all the blame with him a new leader will reap the benefits.
In the meantime Labour are essentially disenfranchising all the people that they need votes from to chase a tiny margin of people that never will back them once the Tory PR machine gets going.
Or worse - simply driving the poor away from the ballot box with their ambivalent response to this cost of living crisis.
As I said - they offer shitty middle management when what people need is Hope.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

This is correct, however, I can’t help but feel they’re picking the wrong battle (again).

People also want ideas and how life would be better under Labour but guessing they’re holding off until nearer election, which is fair enough, especially when the government is potentially unravelling

Yeah, atm why distract with alternative policy? Now *that* would be crazy just atm. Atm the selling point is 'we're not nutters'!

 

[shmmeee]

You think that ‘trust’ will hold? Labour is only holding onto polling leads because the Tory vote had gone into hiding until Johnson goes.
Once he’s despatched and he’s taken all the blame with him a new leader will reap the benefits.
In the meantime Labour are essentially disenfranchising all the people that they need votes from to chase a tiny margin of people that never will back them once the Tory PR machine gets going.
Or worse - simply driving the poor away from the ballot box with their ambivalent response to this cost of living crisis.
As I said - they offer shitty middle management when what people need is Hope.

There is no sign of left wing or economically disadvantaged voters abandoning Labour.

You want them to appeal to you, but people like you and me aren’t a majority and are clustered in Labour strongholds.

That “tiny sliver” is who will decide the next election. And claiming the Tory PR machine will win them over isn’t a reason to cancel the Labour PR machine, it’s a reason to improve it.

The Tories win because they focus on winning, because they know once they’re in they can enact their policies. They are the most effective election winning machine in Western democracy. Labour need to bring at least a little of that nous themselves.

 

[Grendel]

I did you did fucking idiot, you should try and read the story first and not the headline

It still clearly says Labour supports the measures but thinks due to the size of the package the OBR should look at measures.

It's right there in the story but in your rather sad attempts to attack anything that might have something to to do with Rachel Reeves you didn't read the story and made yourself look a c**t.

You clown

You really are an angry little gobshite aren’t you?

 

[skybluetony176]

I have heard it suggested that Sunak hadn’t costed the proposed help vs the measures taken to raise the money and in reality it was about a headline not delivering the policy. Basically the Tories have no intention on delivering the help in full. Maybe this is just building the picture to call that out. With facts.

 

[David O'Day]

You think that ‘trust’ will hold? Labour is only holding onto polling leads because the Tory vote had gone into hiding until Johnson goes.
Once he’s despatched and he’s taken all the blame with him a new leader will reap the benefits.
In the meantime Labour are essentially disenfranchising all the people that they need votes from to chase a tiny margin of people that never will back them once the Tory PR machine gets going.
Or worse - simply driving the poor away from the ballot box with their ambivalent response to this cost of living crisis.
As I said - they offer shitty middle management when what people need is Hope.

Labour aren't disenfranchising anyone, most people will never even know about this story.

Let's be real here

 

[David O'Day]

Oh and grenners my emails tell me you are quoting my posts again.

You are blocked as I don't speak to racists

 

[Grendel]

Oh and grenners my emails tell me you are quoting my posts again.

You are blocked as I don't speak to racists

David you talk to yourself all the time you sad freak

 

[David O'Day]

Grenners, mate I'm really not interested in speaking to you and the weird lies and ramblings you spout and I have you on ignore.

I promised Mark we wouldn't derail every thread with nonsense.

 

[Grendel]

Grenners, mate I'm really not interested in speaking to you and the weird lies and ramblings you spout and I have you on ignore.

I promised Mark we wouldn't derail every thread with nonsense.

As you have me on ignore and this is a politics thread how do you know if I’m just not challenging your views on this issue?