Do you want to discuss boring politics? (184 Viewers)

[Astute]

I didn’t need to - the manifesto spoke for itself.

Like countless billions to save people £20 a month on free Internet?

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

Changing your mind on a policy (nationalisation) that is popular across the voting political spectrum is just plain stupid if you’d prefer.

He’s not in power
Stupid is better than dishonest yes

 

[clint van damme]

If Starmer isn't far left enough for you that's absolutely fine, but to say his Labour government would only be a gnats whisker left of this government is just fucking nuts

They've just appointed a guy who is mates with a bunch of white supremacists as deputy chair

It's not about being 'not left enough'.

I've just listed some of the problems facing this country which I think are pretty unprecedented.

I think the only way to sort them is through politicians being bold, radical and committed to doing their best for the majority of UK citizens not just a privileged few.

I've no confidence that thats Starmer. If people think it is then fine, we'll see.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It's not about being 'not left enough'.

I've just listed some of the problems facing this country which I think are pretty unprecedented.

I think the only way to sort them is through politicians being bold, radical and committed to doing their best for the majority of UK citizens not just a privileged few.

I've no confidence that thats Starmer. If people think it is then fine, we'll see.

Well your choice is sunak starmer or davey

 

[Grendel]

Ok and he’s repackaging the offer to the country as time has moved on.
Im not defending anything but he’s not on the level of Johnson
And as for something slightly left not being worthwhile. Course it is

he also was going to pay for some of this by raising the higher tax rate?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

he also was going to pay for some of this by raising the higher tax rate?

Are you genuinely asking someone to stick to pledges despite what’s changed in the last 2-3 years. You are far from thick

 

[Grendel]

Could do it the Tory way and waste billions on things that don't enrich people's lives or wait for the contracts to run down and do something different.

So is it better to change plans depending on the financial mess the Tories have left us with or plough ahead wasting untold billions like the Tories do?

Nationalising public transport is a no brainer

 

[Grendel]

Are you genuinely asking someone to stick to pledges despite what’s changed in the last 2-3 years. You are far from thick

Well taxing the rich more you’d think wouldn’t be too controversial

 

[clint van damme]

Well your choice is sunak starmer or davey

None are good enough.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Well taxing the rich more you’d think wouldn’t be too controversial

Its not I agree . Much like nationalising transport would be one of the top of my list
I want competent people taking decisions based on what will work not people taking positions based on prejudice or perceived left or right wing. Those who can should pay more for the whole
Basics should be available for all and that includes a working transport system

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

None are good enough.

Yeah but ….

 

[Astute]

Well your choice is sunak starmer or davey

Beat me to it although I was also going to add or anyone else.

 

[clint van damme]

Are you genuinely asking someone to stick to pledges despite what’s changed in the last 2-3 years. You are far from thick

You're missing the point spectacularly Pete.
Why would you flip flop on nationalising rail or energy?

The railways are far worse than when the pledge was made.
We've got an energy crisis since the pledge was made, people are in fuel poverty, we pay an eye watering amount more for our energy than our close neighbours,why would you roll back on that?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Beat me to it although I was also going to add or anyone else.

Who?

 

[Northants Sky Blue]

The state of this thread. Trying to finesse the `perfect' socialist administration will, and alway has, let the Tories back in.

After 15 years of the country going down the toilet it will literally be a "choose a side" election.

And if anyone remotely left leaning (like myself) effectively sides with Kippers it will happen again. Bravo

 

[Astute]

he also was going to pay for some of this by raising the higher tax rate?

Is that like the Tories who have wasted untold billions on that new rail line that gets even more expensive by the week even though it keeps getting shorter?

How about comparing him to your hero Boris.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

You're missing the point spectacularly Pete.
Why would you flip flop on nationalising rail or energy?

The railways are far worse than when the pledge was made.
We've got an energy crisis since the pledge was made, people are in fuel poverty, we pay an eye watering amount more for our energy than our close neighbours,why would you roll back on that?

I don’t think I’m missing the point. But it’s possible sure.
Am I right in you saying he has deceived people to allow him the labour leadership knowing that at some point before the election he intended to remove the pledges because he has made agreements with the right wing media and establishment to not ruffle feathers
So in order to prove that you need some evidence I think
What is definitely the case is that splitting the centre or left of centre would mean one thing

 

[Astute]

Who?

Exactly.

There has been bleak times before. But not one person from any party stands out presently.

 

[Grendel]

Is that like the Tories who have wasted untold billions on that new rail line that gets even more expensive by the week even though it keeps getting shorter?

How about comparing him to your hero Boris.

What’s Starmers view on HS2

 

[clint van damme]

I don’t think I’m missing the point. But it’s possible sure.
Am I right in you saying he has deceived people to allow him the labour leadership knowing that at some point before the election he intended to remove the pledges because he has made agreements with the right wing media and establishment to not ruffle feathers
So in order to prove that you need some evidence I think
What is definitely the case is that splitting the centre or left of centre would mean one thing

I don't know what his motivations are, I haven't said he's made agreements with the right wing media.

I've just pointed out he's reneged on several things he had previously committed to, thats a fact, though some people disagree with me referring to them as lies.

And no one offered a logical explanation as to why he's rolled back on some of his previous commitments.

 

[Astute]

The state of this thread. Trying to finesse the `perfect' socialist administration will, and alway has, let the Tories back in.

After 15 years of the country going down the toilet it will literally be a "choose a side" election.

And if anyone remotely left leaning (like myself) effectively sides with Kippers it will happen again. Bravo

I find it hard to understand how we desperately need a Labour government yet now we look like getting a Labour government next we have hardened Labour voters that don't want the present Labour leader to become PM. It seems they would prefer someone who would let the Tories back in.

An easy question for those who don't want Starmer as PM. When was the last time a hard left.....or even leaning towards it got voted in?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I don't know what his motivations are, I haven't said he's made agreements with the right wing media.

I've just pointed out he's reneged on several things he had previously committed to, thats a fact, though some people disagree with me referring to them as lies.

And no one offered a logical explanation as to why he's rolled back on some of his previous commitments.

I suppose I’m suggesting the world has changed since the pledges were made and I accept you have only said lying which is what I think is unfair especially when comparing him to Johnson

 

[Astute]

I don't know what his motivations are, I haven't said he's made agreements with the right wing media.

I've just pointed out he's reneged on several things he had previously committed to, thats a fact, though some people disagree with me referring to them as lies.

And no one offered a logical explanation as to why he's rolled back on some of his previous commitments.

Affordability?

The Tories have crashed the economy. We are in a totally different place than just a couple of years ago. If Labour keeps up with what is now not affordable the Tories will get back in. Would you prefer that?

 

[clint van damme]

I find it hard to understand how we desperately need a Labour government yet now we look like getting a Labour government next we have hardened Labour voters that don't want the present Labour leader to become PM. It seems they would prefer someone who would let the Tories back in.

An easy question for those who don't want Starmer as PM. When was the last time a hard left.....or even leaning towards it got voted in?

We don't desperately need a Labour government.

We desperately need a government who can sort out the absolute shambles this country has become.
Now, yes, it's far more likely that such a government would be a Labour government, but I honestly have no faith in Starmer.

 

[Astute]

We don't desperately need a Labour government.

We desperately need a government who can sort out the absolute shambles this country has become.
Now, yes, it's far more likely that such a government would be a Labour government, but I honestly have no faith in Starmer.

So you agree we need a Labour government much more than any other party yet you also say we don't.

So who would you prefer to Starmer?

 

[clint van damme]

Affordability?

The Tories have crashed the economy. We are in a totally different place than just a couple of years ago. If Labour keeps up with what is now not affordable the Tories will get back in. Would you prefer that?

Affordability doesn't come into it with the railways though.
And can we afford to carry on with the railways as they are at the moment?
Totally unreliable and hugely expensive.

Yes, renationalising energy could be expensive, but this is my point, we need to be radical.
Renationalising in France hasn't been a walking the park but they're still going ahead with buying up the rest of EDF because the current situation has showed them the necessity of it.

What will happen here is Labour will introduce awinffalltax, they'll knock a bit of our bills, the energy companies will still make eye-watering profit and we'll still be paying more for our energy than any of our European neighbours and this approach will be rinse and repeat across every sector.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

We don't desperately need a Labour government.

We desperately need a government who can sort out the absolute shambles this country has become.
Now, yes, it's far more likely that such a government would be a Labour government, but I honestly have no faith in Starmer.

Because he’s renaged on pledges or more?

 

[clint van damme]

So you agree we need a Labour government much more than any other party yet you also say we don't.

So who would you prefer to Starmer?

No, I said we need a government to sort the country out and I acknowledge Its more likely to be a Labour government.
Who other than Starmer? I honestly don't know.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

No, I said we need a government to sort the country out and I acknowledge Its more likely to be a Labour government.
Who other than Starmer? I honestly don't know.

Maybe it’s Andy Murray

 

[Astute]

Affordability doesn't come into it with the railways though.
And can we afford to carry on with the railways as they are at the moment?
Totally unreliable and hugely expensive.

Yes, renationalising energy could be expensive, but this is my point, we need to be radical.
Renationalising in France hasn't been a walking the park but they're still going ahead with buying up the rest of EDF because the current situation has showed them the necessity of it.

What will happen here is Labour will introduce awinffalltax, they'll knock a bit of our bills, the energy companies will still make eye-watering profit and we'll still be paying more for our energy than any of our European neighbours and this approach will be rinse and repeat across every sector.

France has a massive advantage of already owning much of energy supply/generating.

The railways also need change but ot would cost too much to do in one go. And how much extra would it cost to break all the contracts?

 

[clint van damme]

France has a massive advantage of already owning much of energy supply/generating.

The railways also need change but ot would cost too much to do in one go. And how much extra would it cost to break all the contracts?

Too much to do in one go, agreed. But so many franchises are failing that it wouldn't take long to bring them under government control.

Trans pennine are just about finished and avanti are on thin ice

 

[Astute]

No, I said we need a government to sort the country out and I acknowledge Its more likely to be a Labour government.
Who other than Starmer? I honestly don't know.

Which is my point.

Starmer to me is the best out of a not very good choice. This includes all parties. Yet by the look of it we are supposed to get rid of Starmer with no idea who his replacement should be. All that would happen is we would play into the hands of the Tories yet again and suffer another 5 years of the rich getting richer and the poor getting more destitute. They don't care about the poor. They don't vote Tory.

 

[Astute]

Too much to do in one go, agreed. But so many franchises are failing that it wouldn't take long to bring them under government control.

Trans pennine are just about finished and avanti are on thin ice

Which is what I have been saying. Yet most on here just seem to always want to disagree with everything I say even when they agree with me

 

[clint van damme]

Which is what I have been saying. Yet most on here just seem to always want to disagree with everything I say even when they agree with me

To be honest, the debate isn't about the point you made, it's about Starmer and his rolling back on pledges.
If people are OK to let that slide that's fine but it's not something I'm happy with.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

To be honest, the debate isn't about the point you made, it's about Starmer and his rolling back on pledges.
If people are OK to let that slide that's fine but it's not something I'm happy with.

Not ok but understandable I think
I don’t know what I think really. In many ways I like to think of myself as quite selfless but I know I only manage that out of having enough and have always been lucky to have had that.
Don’t get me wrong I work hard and am reliable and loved by many but I know how privileged I am in lots of ways
I happily voted for Blair and felt hugely let down by the Iraq lies and war.
Its been a depressing 13 years of the inequality increasing exponentially and many in our society being left behind
As others have said you don’t change the make up of a country politically and by nature we are a centrist maybe slightly left but not much which means it’s who you carry with you that means transformative politics is possible. Starmers history and motivations are stacked with compassionate socialist upbringing. His professional life will have changed that upbringing and tailored what he thinks is possible with power. A competent leader is desperately needed I hope he’s more than that