• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Baleforce said:
Elphicke is a complete clam, why have Labour let her in?
Click to expand...

I agree. As much as I’ve taken glee in the demise of the Tory’s I personally lean much more to the left than the current Labour leadership.

I likewise think it’s not sensible to let her in. I guess right now Labour want to make a mockery of the Tory’s and let them know their own MPs are unhappy.

These MPs seem to be standing down next election anyways. In return they’re getting paid or unpaid advisory positions. Either way it suits them personally to be within the governing party. There’s nothing for them to gain - as impending former politicians - from being in with the outgoing government.

I don’t think anyone could be short sighted enough to genuinely believe they suddenly have lost faith in the politics they ( disclaimer: without knowing their voting records) introduced.

It’s all self centred - on both sides. Any one who chooses to defect draws attention more so to the Tory inner circles lack of belief that they will not be in government. More so than a lack of belief they cannot govern.

Any opposition will always argue the government cannot govern. Every politician that defects is proof of their inner circles resignation to defeat.

If it was down to me I’d be asking whether the person we’re admitting represents the parties values. Either Labour have decided she does not but is worth admitting and her skills will come in useful - or it’s an indication of the direction Labour will go in.

Personally I believe it’s an indication that Starmer won’t shake the boat too much. I personally do not believe that he will offer the level of investment the country needs to jumpstart and rejuvenate itself. That the “broad church” isn’t just to attract dissenters but is what it says on the tin.

But I do still believe we will fair better than we ever did in 15 years on the road to nowhere.
 
Craig_J said:
I agree. As much as I’ve taken glee in the demise of the Tory’s I personally lean much more to the left than the current Labour leadership.

I likewise think it’s not sensible to let her in. I guess right now Labour want to make a mockery of the Tory’s and let them know their own MPs are unhappy.

These MPs seem to be standing down next election anyways. In return they’re getting paid or unpaid advisory positions. Either way it suits them personally to be within the governing party. There’s nothing for them to gain - as impending former politicians - from being in with the outgoing government.

I don’t think anyone could be short sighted enough to genuinely believe they suddenly have lost faith in the politics they ( disclaimer: without knowing their voting records) introduced.

It’s all self centred - on both sides. Any one who chooses to defect draws attention more so to the Tory inner circles lack of belief that they will not be in government. More so than a lack of belief they cannot govern.

Any opposition will always argue the government cannot govern. Every politician that defects is proof of their inner circles resignation to defeat.

If it was down to me I’d be asking whether the person we’re admitting represents the parties values. Either Labour have decided she does not but is worth admitting and her skills will come in useful - or it’s an indication of the direction Labour will go in.

Personally I believe it’s an indication that Starmer won’t shake the boat too much. I personally do not believe that he will offer the level of investment the country needs to jumpstart and rejuvenate itself. That the “broad church” isn’t just to attract dissenters but is what it says on the tin.

But I do still believe we will fair better than we ever did in 15 years on the road to nowhere.
Click to expand...
I think it was a pretty smart move on Starmer’s part.

Most of the voting British public don’t pay very much attention to politics. They won’t have a clue who Elphicke is - but they will read or hear the headline, which is that another Tory has defected, signalling once again that the government is in a state of absolute chaos.

Most of the criticism of the decision is from the left of the party, and they have zero experience in the last 40 years of putting together a platform that the public will vote for, so I turn a deaf ear to it.

Election campaigns are a dirty business; this one will be particularly so, I fear. I’m pleased to see the Labour leadership engaging in a bit of sh i thousery.
 
Hello, I only came in to this pub to ask for directions, but I saw that the news was on the telly, so I'll stay. I agree with what Mikey10 says above.

As an old Old Labour person, who grew up in the world made by Attlee and Wilson, I'm not (at present) a big fan of Starmer, but I live in hope that he may prove to be more of a lefty than he currently appears to be. I was not a huge fan of Blair, but I acknowledge his many achievements as well as his appalling failures. I have always regarded Corbyn as untrustworthy and foolish, and I think that when he was Labour Leader he empowered the right. There are no words sufficiently strong for me to express how much I detest the current Government. I haven't stayed up all night for a General Election since May 1997. I will be staying up all night for the next one.
 
Gutter Boy said:
That was when the Tories had a reputation for competence. They were always known as being competent but evil (compared to Labour's well-intentioned but incompetent).
But now after Covid, Truss and the crumbling national infrastructure, they have nowhere to go. Incompetent and evil.
Click to expand...


The notion that the Tories have the safer hands is not well supported by the evidence. Neither party has a distinct edge, but it is arguable that Labour have been, on average, as good as if not slightly better than the Tories when it comes to managing the economy.

Labour have tended to come into power when things are in a right state . The Tories can't be blamed for the raggedy state of things in 1945, but they left things in a mess in 1964, 1974, and 1997.

Starmer will inherit an omnishambles from the current Government. I am not sure that he or his Front Bench have the ideas and skills to fix the broken things. Attlee, Wilson (1964 version), and Blair had the ideas, the skills, and the teams to make things better, and the economy was better in 1997 than it is now. Starmer will need, I think, at least ten years to get anywhere near fixing the damage done by the worst Government in living memory.

www.channel4.com

FactCheck Q&A: Which party has a better track record on the economy?

Who has the better record on managing the economy: Labour or the Conservatives?
www.channel4.com www.channel4.com

theconversation.com

Labour are much better at running the economy than voters think – new research

We looked at 100 years of Tory and Labour governments to see who was better at producing GDP.
theconversation.com theconversation.com
 
Diamond Lights said:
i think it's safe to say Elphicke's move has made everyone look worse for it. The Tories, Labour, and herself. no one winning from it.
Click to expand...

Why do Labour look bad? An MP wishing to switch sides and feeling more aligned to Labour than with the Cons. An endorsement of Labour no?

Anyone would think such party switches had never happened before, yet it’s a common thing; and gives Labour one more seat in parliament.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Why do Labour look bad? An MP wishing to switch sides and feeling more aligned to Labour than with the Cons. An endorsement of Labour no?

Anyone would think such party switches had never happened before, yet it’s a common thing; and gives Labour one more seat in parliament.
Click to expand...

The issue is more that in accepting her, they appear to endorse her politics.
 
Baleforce said:
The issue is more that in accepting her, they appear to endorse her politics.
Click to expand...
She was accepted as 95% of people in this country pay politics very little attention on a day-to-day basis. They will only see and remember the headline about another Tory MP defecting, and that will reinforce the feel of a governing party in terminal decline. They’ll have no idea what her political beliefs are.
 
Baleforce said:
The issue is more that in accepting her, they appear to endorse her politics.
Click to expand...

Why? As though the Labour Party would adapt its own doctrine for one MP. Makes no sense.

While the public feel political parties are akin to Spur vs the Goons, the reality is quite different. And there are all sorts of cross-party committees, discussions and alignments. Ideologies are often the enemy of progress. So many get caught up in doctrine and in-groups. They put this above making positive change. The Labour left almost prefer Tories than a pragmatic centre left. Baffling.
 
Mikey10 said:
She was accepted as 95% of people in this country pay politics very little attention on a day-to-day basis. They will only see and remember the headline about another Tory MP defecting, and that will reinforce the feel of a governing party in terminal decline. They’ll have no idea what her political beliefs are.
Click to expand...

Or reinforce the feeling that all parties are the same.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Why? As though the Labour Party would adapt its own doctrine for one MP. Makes no sense.

While the public feel political parties are akin to Spur vs the Goons, the reality is quite different. And there are all sorts of cross-party committees, discussions and alignments. Ideologies are often the enemy of progress. So many get caught up in doctrine and in-groups. They put this above making positive change. The Labour left almost prefer Tories than a pragmatic centre left. Baffling.
Click to expand...

Because parties still have a political starting point.

This is a woman who came out against poor children being fed and improving our attempts to tackle climate change.

She is a very right wing clam.
 
Baleforce said:
Or reinforce the feeling that all parties are the same.
Click to expand...

I agree all parties are full of arseholes, liars and wanabees and it would be hard to find a honest person in any of them. I was always a Labour voter until Blair took us to a war on a lie and since then its hard to tell who has any decency in any party.
 
Baleforce said:
Because parties still have a political starting point.

This is a woman who came out against poor children being fed and improving our attempts to tackle climate change.

She is a very right wing clam.
Click to expand...

Have you considered the reverse? That joining Labour might make her a better person? 😅 Maybe she wanted to back these things but was constrained by the party. If she’s not standing in the next election, the only material difference is an extra vote for Labour whipped votes, and as Mikey says a sign of the general shift to the left.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Have you considered the reverse? That joining Labour might make her a better person? 😅 Maybe she wanted to back these things but was constrained by the party. If she’s not standing in the next election, the only material difference is an extra vote for Labour whipped votes, and as Mikey says a sign of the general shift to the left.
Click to expand...

If she wanted to back those things she should have said so at the time.

I have no time for politicians that bend to the whips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back