YouGov Poll - 33 Point lead!

Laughing said:

But you didn't use it as a stick to beat Corbyn with. The rest is just you whining because the labour party doesn't represent you any more.

That's democracy, live with it.

Click to expand...

As I have already explained, I didn't regard PR as such a pressing need because a Corbyn government would have been representative of the needs of far more of the electorate. In those days I would have been more preoccupied with defending Corbyn from false claims (many from Labour supporters on here) of antiSemitism.

Laughing said:

No it isn't, I agree. However, for the moment that is the system we have and Labour can't change that from the opposition benches and the tories sure as **** ain't going to change it.

Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but this to me sounds like you are a proponent of PR and are expressing disappointment or frustration that the Tories have no intention of changing it. I merely pointed out that Labour have no intention of changing it either.

BlindBoyGrunt said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but this to me sounds like you are a proponent of PR and are expressing disappointment or frustration that the Tories have no intention of changing it. I merely pointed out that Labour have no intention of changing it either.

Click to expand...

Neither party will change it, and Labour under Corbyn wouldn't have either if they had somehow managed to get over the line and forma government

PR would be progress…but constitutional reform along side it is required. Only Belarus in Europe use FPTP. But if the population prefer being treated like children?
….and so it goes

SuperStu said:

Think this is a bit disingenuous tbh Laughing.

If you're going to post stuff like:



Which lets be honest, is plucked out of thin air, then obviously someone is going to point out that really there's no reason to think a Starmer government would reform the voting system. That's not beating him with a stick, it's just not engaging in fantasy and make believe. If you were on here saying voting for Starmer will magically cure all disease, and someone said no it won't, it doesn't mean they're holding him to an unfair standard.

Keir Starmer defies call for changes to first past the post voting system

The Labour leader said electoral reform was not a priority and refused to make it one of the party’s election manifesto pledges

www.theguardian.com

Keir Starmer Now Opposes Scrapping Westminster’s Voting System for PR in Blow for Reformers – Byline Times

His spokesman told Byline Times that the Labour Leader has a "long-standing view against PR"

bylinetimes.com

Voting reform not a priority for Labour, says Starmer

Sir Keir Starmer has said that electoral reform will not be a priority for a Labour government. Taking questions after a speech in central London, the Labour leader played down any prospect of his party embarking on a project of electoral reform if it takes power after the next general election...

nation.cymru

Against proportional representation? What else hasn’t Starmer told us? | John Rentoul

The Labour leader says he wants growth rather than higher taxes – but all politicians say that

www.independent.co.uk

And again I come back to one of the points I made yesterday. If you genuinely, truly, honestly believe Starmer is planning to put "voting reform" in his manifesto, and then force PR through Parliament, after spending years telling the press and public he doesn't plan to reform voting - are you actually happy with that? Even if it means the tories are even more unhinged next time they're in power? If it's repeated over a few policies how do you expect the party to win a second term?

Click to expand...

Are you OK Stu? You have taken my post completely out of context and accused me of lying?

Firstly whether starmer reforms the electoral system or not wasnt my point. That Bbg used it as a sick to beat starmer but not Corbyn with was my whole point. It's cherry picking.

There is nothing disengenuous about that.

I suppose you may be getting at the point I made that we may get pr under Labour?

We may well. Pr doesn't have to be in the manifesto. Electoral reform does. And at long as that is in the manifesto then the door is open for pr.

I could explain why starmer is distancing himself from pr directly but there is no point in that you and others will just ignore the reasons and continue to bash starmer.

As I said in an earlier post. This is democracy in action. You don't like the way the Labour Party is going that's tough I am afraid. Find another party that better reflects your views.

Moaning about Labour at the moment only helps the tories! Also it's just boring. The same people saying the same things over and over again.

Wet know how you feel, let's move on.

BoroMart said:

sometimes, sometimes he acts as he has on this thread

Click to expand...

I'm not the one doing the cyber equivalent of sticking my fingers in my ears and shouting "la la la I can't hear you".

I'm not the one doing the old "I know you are you said you are so what am I" routine.

And I'm not the one who posted a 20 point technical definition to prove that something that hadn't been said was wrong, and then spat my dummy out when it was pointed out that the first 5 pages of search engine results were awash with articles calling it into question.

You then doubled down on your accusations despite being told you were mistaken AND being presented with the evidence (which you'd already chosen to ignore).

I'm not going to pretend I've covered myself in glory but every escalation has come from you not just accepting you made a mistake.

And now, again, you're pretending you're the grown up voice of reason. It's a bit pathetic.

You got something wrong. Own it.

I'll leave this spat here as anyone that cares can see how it developed and I don't want to hog this thread further.

Laughing said:

Firstly whether starmer reforms the electoral system or not wasnt my point. That Bbg used it as a sick to beat starmer but not Corbyn with was my whole point. It's cherry picking.

Click to expand...

Laughing said:

I could explain why starmer is distancing himself from pr directly but there is no point in that you and others will just ignore the reasons and continue to bash starmer.

Click to expand...

There is a clear difference between the two though.

The membership under Starmer voted overwhelmingly for electoral change at Conference. Starmer and the NEC have largely ignored that vote.

Corbyn wasn't in that position - and, had he been, he would (based on his record) have accepted that democratic decision.

Scrote said:

Corbyn wasn't in that position - and, had he been, he would (based on his record) have accepted that democratic decision.

Click to expand...

Really? He happily ignored losing a Vote of Confidence.

Muttley said:

Really? He happily ignored losing a Vote of Confidence.

Click to expand...

Did he. I seem to recall there being a leadership election which went back to the members, as per the party rules.

Laughing said:

We may well. Pr doesn't have to be in the manifesto. Electoral reform does. And at long as that is in the manifesto then the door is open for pr.

Click to expand...

But going by what Starmer has consistently said for the last few years now, we won't get PR, and Electoral Reform won't be in the manifesto. You're just imagining what you want to happen. If someone then points out that its not likely to be the case, they're not doing something horribly unfair to Starmer. They're just taking him at his word.

Laughing said:

I could explain why starmer is distancing himself from pr directly but there is no point in that you and others will just ignore the reasons and continue to bash starmer.

Click to expand...

Well go on then, lets hear it? But yes, to be fair, if your explanation is something like "he's lying to the public cause they're too dumb to know whats best and I'm a mindreader so I always know which commitments he's going to stick to or not" then yeah expect that to be bashed.

Laughing said:

Moaning about Labour at the moment only helps the tories! Also it's just boring. The same people saying the same things over and over again.

Wet know how you feel, let's move on.

Click to expand...

Post about whatever you want to post about and I'll do the same. I never think there's any point on here in trying to police who's allowed to comment on specific topics. Comes across a bit culty.

SuperStu said:

But going by what Starmer has consistently said for the last few years now, we won't get PR, and Electoral Reform won't be in the manifesto. You're just imagining what you want to happen. If someone then points out that its not likely to be the case, they're not doing something horribly unfair to Starmer. They're just taking him at his word.



Well go on then, lets hear it? But yes, to be fair, if your explanation is something like "he's lying to the public cause they're too dumb to know whats best and I'm a mindreader so I always know which commitments he's going to stick to or not" then yeah expect that to be bashed.



Post about whatever you want to post about and I'll do the same. I never think there's any point on here in trying to police who's allowed to comment on specific topics. Comes across a bit culty.

Click to expand...

Round and round we go.

Starmer has polling data on pr and overall it's a vote loser. That's why he has distanced the labour party from this. You knew that though, right?

Starmer has mentioned on numerous occasions that electoral reform, Whilst low on the agenda is still something he would like to pursue.

You want Labour to enact everything you want in a single parliament. That isn't going to happen. You really need to grow up and understand the reality of where we are. It's one of the reasons why Labour are, quite rightly not spending time repealing all the crap legislation that the tories have brought in. The legislation in and off itself does nothing. But again, you knew this too.

Let me say this again, vote for who you want to. Let the rest of us vote for our preference. It's a democracy, that's how it works.

Chris_Boro said:

There are many different types of PR systems and that's before deciding how a parliament would look. It would realistically need multiple referendums and a vastly greater information campaign just to get to an informed choice. The AV referendum was rubbish at explaining what AV even was, we can't do that again.

If we just stuck a load of PR models on a ballot and said go nuts, that's would pretty much guarantee a very costly chaos.

Click to expand...

It wouldn't need a referendum. It would need a party to include it in their manifesto, or not, and just follow a model seen as successful elsewhere.

Laughing said:

Let me say this again, vote for who you want to. Let the rest of us vote for our preference. It's a democracy, that's how it works.

Click to expand...

Weird thing to come out with. How exactly am I not letting anyone vote for their preference? By occasionally joining in on threads on here to give my opinion?

Laughing said:

Starmer has polling data on pr and overall it's a vote loser. That's why he has distanced the labour party from this. You knew that though, right?

Starmer has mentioned on numerous occasions that electoral reform, Whilst low on the agenda is still something he would like to pursue.

Click to expand...

Yesterday I posted links to a number of articles. From them:

On Thursday, Keir Starmer’s spokesperson said he has a “longstanding view against proportional representation”.

Click to expand...

But Starmer’s official spokesperson has now revealed that the Labour Leader has a “long-standing view against proportional representation”. When asked to clarify if the Labour leader was against PR he said “yes”.

“He isn’t looking to change the electoral system…It’s not something that’s a priority for him,” Starmer’s spokesperson added.

Click to expand...

Keir Starmer has ruled out including any support for a change in the voting system in Labour’s election manifesto

Click to expand...

Asked if Labour’s manifesto would include pledges on electoral reform, he said: “No, it’s not a priority for me.”

Click to expand...

So I'm sorry I just don't know where you're getting the idea its still something he wants to pursue.

I'll ask again. Suppose you're right about everything: Starmers lying about electoral reform now, its a vote loser, hes gonna reveal his deception post election and install PR without a mandate. Great! But won't it chase off all those tory voters hes spent the last 5 years wooing? Won't it mean that the next time the tories get in they have a ready made excuse to do any constitutional changes they want without a mandate?

Laughing said:

You want Labour to enact everything you want in a single parliament. That isn't going to happen.

Click to expand...

What's that based on? I don't think it's something I've said. In fact I've said the opposite loads of times on here. I'm very transactional. I'm ripe to be triangulated. I'd be really pleased if Labour would believably commit to anything I want. Gimme, gimme, gimme. What I'm less keen on is this idea that I'm obliged to vote for tory policies now and just never discuss politics, and maybe I'll be rewarded in 2 or 3 terms time.

Corcaigh_the_Cat said:

It wouldn't need a referendum. It would need a party to include it in their manifesto, or not, and just follow a model seen as successful elsewhere.

Click to expand...

I believe a fundamental change to our democratic process is something one party, who probably won't get 50% of the popular vote, shouldn't be in charge of.

All major parties would have a vested interest in implementing a system that would do the least damage to them.

Not that referendums would be free from similar influences.

Scrote said:

I'm not the one doing the cyber equivalent of sticking my fingers in my ears and shouting "la la la I can't hear you".

I'm not the one doing the old "I know you are you said you are so what am I" routine.

And I'm not the one who posted a 20 point technical definition to prove that something that hadn't been said was wrong, and then spat my dummy out when it was pointed out that the first 5 pages of search engine results were awash with articles calling it into question.

You then doubled down on your accusations despite being told you were mistaken AND being presented with the evidence (which you'd already chosen to ignore).

I'm not going to pretend I've covered myself in glory but every escalation has come from you not just accepting you made a mistake.

And now, again, you're pretending you're the grown up voice of reason. It's a bit pathetic.

You got something wrong. Own it.

I'll leave this spat here as anyone that cares can see how it developed and I don't want to hog this thread further.

Click to expand...

Nope, I still can’t be bothered to read another word salad from you, let it go

SuperStu said:

Weird thing to come out with. How exactly am I not letting anyone vote for their preference? By occasionally joining in on threads on here to give my opinion?



Yesterday I posted links to a number of articles. From them:






So I'm sorry I just don't know where you're getting the idea its still something he wants to pursue.

I'll ask again. Suppose you're right about everything: Starmers lying about electoral reform now, its a vote loser, hes gonna reveal his deception post election and install PR without a mandate. Great! But won't it chase off all those tory voters hes spent the last 5 years wooing? Won't it mean that the next time the tories get in they have a ready made excuse to do any constitutional changes they want without a mandate?



What's that based on? I don't think it's something I've said. In fact I've said the opposite loads of times on here. I'm very transactional. I'm ripe to be triangulated. I'd be really pleased if Labour would believably commit to anything I want. Gimme, gimme, gimme. What I'm less keen on is this idea that I'm obliged to vote for tory policies now and just never discuss politics, and maybe I'll be rewarded in 2 or 3 terms time.

Click to expand...

So firstly let me deal with your last point first. When I said you, I was using the colloquial yous meaning you, scrote, Bbg etc. Apologies.

So to your first point. You are off course not stopping people voting their preference but you seem to be trying very hard to sway them against voting Labour. The alternative is unthinkable. You know this so why the constant drip drip of Labour bad.

On electoral reform. I have no idea whether starmer will or will not look to achieve something. We haven't seen a manifesto yet but as I said I know exactly why he is staying away from it. It's an overall vote loser.

Likewise loads of policies he has renegade on. It's too do with how the compliant media will spin it. You know this yet choose to ignore the environment in which starmer has to operate. Had Corbyn been something other than a 6th form politician you may have got your wish and we wouldn't be having this conversation. But again, I am sure I am not saying anything you don't already know, yet we will go round this particular bush umpteen times before the election with you criticising Labour and giving no viable alternative. It's tedious and pointless. What would you have Labour supporters do, in your ideal world? Vote for whom?

Laughing said:

It's too do with how the compliant media will spin it. You know this yet choose to ignore the environment in which starmer has to operate.

Click to expand...

I disagree. To me Starmer has a lot more freedom with the media than Corbyn ever had. Yes they call him boring, and very recently a few journos have picked up on his inconsistencies but it's not comparable. For the last few years of his leadership Corbyn couldn't say a sentence out loud to a journalist without them talking over him to demand an apology.

Take 2022 when the energy crisis was happening and bills were doubling. There was no big media clamour then that Labour must drop nationalisation as a policy/pledge/ambition or whatever it was being called at the time. The opposite. You couldn't ask for a more PERFECT media environment to stand by that policy and bring people over to your side. It was Starmer’s decision not to do that. don't blame me, its nothing personal, I don't wish to bash him. But thats what happened. During that crisis, with everyone suffering, he decided It was time to cover for private capital.

Long term I think thats damaging. Look at Nigel Farage and his approach to campaigning. For literally decades he would spin any media story or crisis into being a reason why people should be anti-EU and it worked. For us to ever have a chance of reaching a point where this country can support socialising the economy a bit, someone is going to have to advocate for it. Consistently.

Laughing said:

yet we will go round this particular bush umpteen times before the election with you criticising Labour and giving no viable alternative. It's tedious and pointless.

Click to expand...

Well... you can't please them all I guess. I find discussing this stuff interesting. Sorry it's tedious for you.

I do think it's a bit odd that you and others seem more concerned with getting me to stop posting rather than refuting anything I say. Whats that all about?

Laughing said:

What would you have Labour supporters do, in your ideal world? Vote for whom?

Click to expand...

Well if someone is a "Labour supporter" they should vote for Labour I guess. What are we saying they're supporting there though? A name? A red branding colour scheme?

If someone is a democratic socialist they probably shouldn't vote Labour IMO because the Labour Party are no longer offering democratic socialism. To me, that's not a good thing because that's what the party was set up for.

Its like if Gibbo suddenly decided to switch MFC over to being a rugby team, and you then get annoyed about me no longer wanting to watch matches.

SuperStu said:

I disagree. To me Starmer has a lot more freedom with the media than Corbyn ever had. Yes they call him boring, and very recently a few journos have picked up on his inconsistencies but it's not comparable. For the last few years of his leadership Corbyn couldn't say a sentence out loud to a journalist without them talking over him to demand an apology.

Take 2022 when the energy crisis was happening and bills were doubling. There was no big media clamour then that Labour must drop nationalisation as a policy/pledge/ambition or whatever it was being called at the time. The opposite. You couldn't ask for a more PERFECT media environment to stand by that policy and bring people over to your side. It was Starmer’s decision not to do that. don't blame me, its nothing personal, I don't wish to bash him. But thats what happened. During that crisis, with everyone suffering, he decided It was time to cover for private capital.

Long term I think thats damaging. Look at Nigel Farage and his approach to campaigning. For literally decades he would spin any media story or crisis into being a reason why people should be anti-EU and it worked. For us to ever have a chance of reaching a point where this country can support socialising the economy a bit, someone is going to have to advocate for it. Consistently.



Well... you can't please them all I guess. I find discussing this stuff interesting. Sorry it's tedious for you.

I do think it's a bit odd that you and others seem more concerned with getting me to stop posting rather than refuting anything I say. Whats that all about?



Well if someone is a "Labour supporter" they should vote for Labour I guess. What are we saying they're supporting there though? A name? A red branding colour scheme?

If someone is a democratic socialist they probably shouldn't vote Labour IMO because the Labour Party are no longer offering democratic socialism. To me, that's not a good thing because that's what the party was set up for.

Its like if Gibbo suddenly decided to switch MFC over to being a rugby team, and you then get annoyed about me no longer wanting to watch matches.

Click to expand...

Corbyn handed the press all the ammunition they needed. Starmer gets an easier ride because they have nothing on him. A moments thought would tell you this. Remember beergate, donkeygate. Because he gives them no ammunition.

Corbyn was just a poor politician.

People want you to stop damaging labours chances because the alternative is unthinkable, which I have already said.

We are not in the 6th form discussing politics in the vacum of parental security. It's the real world with real consequences.

Laughing said:

Starmer gets an easier ride because they have nothing on him. A moments thought would tell you this.

Click to expand...

Maybe you're the one who needs to think longer on it. Maybe the press give him an easier ride out of self interest?

Laughing said:

People want you to stop damaging labours chances

Click to expand...

Calm down. Whatever I say on here has zero bearing on Labour's chances. Don't be ridiculous.

Laughing said:

We are not in the 6th form discussing politics in the vacum of parental security. It's the real world with real consequences.

Click to expand...

Yeah 6th form great. And you call me tedious!

SuperStu said:

Maybe you're the one who needs to think longer on it. Maybe the press give him an easier ride out of self interest?



Calm down. Whatever I say on here has zero bearing on Labour's chances. Don't be ridiculous.



Yeah 6th form great. And you call me tedious!

Click to expand...

Well that was a waste.

I'll be voting Labour as stated
The country needs a change - it's getting bad now, and 14 years is too long. The Tories have nothing left to offer
I'm not expecting to persuade anyone to vote for anyone, but the polls would suggest a lot of people are feeling the same. I'm always glass half empty on opinion polls, but they aren't shifting - so I'm hoping Labour get in and at least make a start in turning things around. Just stopping it getting any worse and halting the decline would be a start