Do you want to discuss boring politics? (25 Viewers)

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
I'd say bringing rail, water and power back into public ownership is the best way to deal with cost of living. Set a power tarrif lower than the price cap, win votes by going populist and saying British profits for British people, borrow against future profits when said utilities make money again when subsidy no longer needed.

Its such an uphill battle though, we saw it last time. Bringing in divisive policies that play to your weaknesses with voters isn’t smart.
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
Frankly if it’s not cost of living, climate, crime, health, education id scrap it right now. Keep the focus on a few simple policies you know everyone can defend.
Yeah I’m sure that will work out a storm…. he’s done such a sterling job so far in these areas.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Its such an uphill battle though, we saw it last time. Bringing in divisive policies that play to your weaknesses with voters isn’t smart.
But it's not a particularly divisive policy, especially atm. If you're not going to do it when prices are obscene and affecting peoples' ability to function, when *is* the right time?

If we're assuming Labour 2019 was overly radical, I'd agree. 2017 played quite well though. You could argue 2017 with a less controversial and / or more articulate leader would have played even better.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
But it's not a particularly divisive policy, especially atm. If you're not going to do it when prices are obscene and affecting peoples' ability to function, when *is* the right time?

If we're assuming Labour 2019 was overly radical, I'd agree. 2017 played quite well though. You could argue 2017 with a less controversial and / or more articulate leader would have played even better.

Inb4 shmmeeee dismisses it as the Brexit election
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Inb4 shmmeeee dismisses it as the Brexit election
It was, to an extent, and a more authoritative leader on that particular issue would have played better, too. It was also Johnson putting in spending plans, meaning Labour went mental with their's in return - a bit like when Tories went uber-righty when Blair claimed some of their ground.

So that lost a lot of their authority. The 2017 one, sure, among certain people was seen as spend spend spend, but it played reasonably well, and was reasonably balanced too, once the party had been able to filter what Corbyn may have wanted, through what was maybe realistic. If we accept that you move a bit more centre from 2017, there's still space for basic policy goals that can remain indeterminate, and be promised when the time is right - that's surely a better approach than dismissing them entirely for the period of a parliament.

Especially when, on the other side, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer is doing a fine job of rubbishing Truss's fiscal capabilities, and is making the case for higher tax to fund higher investment!
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Lol yesterday all the shadow ministers were contradicting each other over rail. He will be backing Rwanda soon
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Inb4 shmmeeee dismisses it as the Brexit election

I mean they were a lot about Brexit but also against a terrible Tory campaign and we didn’t win.
It was, to an extent, and a more authoritative leader on that particular issue would have played better, too. It was also Johnson putting in spending plans, meaning Labour went mental with their's in return - a bit like when Tories went uber-righty when Blair claimed some of their ground.

So that lost a lot of their authority. The 2017 one, sure, among certain people was seen as spend spend spend, but it played reasonably well, and was reasonably balanced too, once the party had been able to filter what Corbyn may have wanted, through what was maybe realistic. If we accept that you move a bit more centre from 2017, there's still space for basic policy goals that can remain indeterminate, and be promised when the time is right - that's surely a better approach than dismissing them entirely for the period of a parliament.

Especially when, on the other side, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer is doing a fine job of rubbishing Truss's fiscal capabilities, and is making the case for higher tax to fund higher investment!

Yeah I think that’s a fair shout, I just wonder how much it’s been tainted by Corbyn in 2019 at this point.

The Tories attack is going to be “it’s still Corbyn” because they’re innovative like that, I can understand shying away from the most Corbyny policies.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Poor Sir Beer 😂

 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I can understand shying away from the most Corbyny policies.
But rail nationalisation isn't just restricted to Corbyn. It's one thing where the leadership have often been at odds with the membership.


And as we've seen, following the members isn't necessarily the right thing to do, but this isn't an overly controversial policy among the public at large.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Poor Sir Beer 😂


Was that written by a 12 year old?

Actually, did you write that?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Was that written by a 12 year old?

Actually, did you write that?

Clearly not as it’s a labour member - calling labour members simple now are we 😂
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
If someone is 'simple' then they are simple, doesn't matter what party they support.

Isnt simple a bit like being a retard? You are saying the person who wrote this has some learning disabilities?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
But rail nationalisation isn't just restricted to Corbyn. It's one thing where the leadership have often been at odds with the membership.


And as we've seen, following the members isn't necessarily the right thing to do, but this isn't an overly controversial policy among the public at large.

No I agree. I just think the thinking is it invites comparisons. It’s a cornerstone left wing policy.

If it were me I’d be pushing it as a Brexit bonus and say we can take control of our energy now (I know that’s bollocks), but Starmer hasn’t the charisma to pull that off I don’t think. He’s going for boring and reliable against Tory chaos. Which is at least playing to his strengths.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Also what is wrong with the article - it’s well researched - seems someone is very into the great Orator
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member

Grendel

Well-Known Member
What is your obsession with calling people retarded?

You're a fucking weirdo.

What’s yours with calling people simple?
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
What’s yours with calling people simple?

Simple means not very intelligent. Which, judging by his writing, is quite accurate.

It's very different to retard and you know it.

Actually, I'm not sure you do. Because you think retard is acceptable.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Simple means not very intelligent. Which, judging by his writing, is quite accurate.

It's very different to retard and you know it.

Actually, I'm not sure you do. Because you think retard is acceptable.

It means lacking mental capacity I think you actually meant the author is a moron as a moron is someone with the mental ability of an 8 to 12 year old

Nice
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
I don’t understand why we don’t have young and good looking people running for PM they would be far more popular. For example I bet more people watched Luca sing a High School Musical song last night on love island than watched the debate. I would certainly tune in if this was the case.

The problem is some of them are so emotionally fragile they can't even deal with the rejection of getting banned from an Internet football forum
 
  • Haha
Reactions: PVA

Grendel

Well-Known Member
But rail nationalisation isn't just restricted to Corbyn. It's one thing where the leadership have often been at odds with the membership.


And as we've seen, following the members isn't necessarily the right thing to do, but this isn't an overly controversial policy among the public at large.

I’ve said a nationalised railway system that focuses on servicing the public is a good policy especially if you want more of the public to use it as time moves on

It’s a truly bizarre U Turn
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I’ve said a nationalised railway system that focuses on servicing the public is a good policy especially if you want more of the public to use it as time moves on

It’s a truly bizarre U Turn
Politically, surely the time to do it is when people are complaining about the service and the cost of something, too? When would be a better time?!?
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
I’ve said a nationalised railway system that focuses on servicing the public is a good policy especially if you want more of the public to use it as time moves on

It’s a truly bizarre U Turn

Imagine if it were possible to scrap HS2 on top
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top