Labour 10 points ahead of Tories...

[Andy_W]

May had the highest approval ratings of any PM since records began when she called the 2017 election. People were confidently predicting a 200 seat majority. That you don't think she's a powerhouse now, is testament to Labour's performance in that election.

Boris won London mayor. Twice. And he seemed to even surprise himself winning the referendum. And the sort of majority the tories haven't had since the 80s. Definitely a political powerhouse. If he's replaced before the next election, and the tories do badly for a while, they'll have party members desperate for him to come back, like the centrists in Labour pining for Blair to return for years.

That approval rating didn't mean anything, she'd never won an election before 2017, she got in because Cameron won, and had only been in the job a year when the next election came. She then lost seats from the last election with Cameron as got 317 seats, that's not even a majority, so clearly when it came to the crunch that approval rating, wasn't enough approval to get votes, clearly she was approved of more than JC mind. I didn't actually mind May all that much (for a Tory), she had little chance running that party of bell ends, and getting them to tow the line. The Tories clearly wanted more of a far right nut job, and she was clearly seen as "not man enough" by them, but they're a bunch of discriminative pricks.

BJ won London Mayor through his "different" character, not through his capabilities, some actually thought that character was good, obviously the reality of that in a high pressure job has shown his true colours (most already knew these), and more and more are learning that he's a lying clown with no substance.

He was only an MP for 3 years before being Mayor, and before that a poor journalist, who was sacked twice for lying, hardly good credentials for being an MP. People were conned on the Mayor thing, like they were conned on Brexit.

BJ just switches sides and jumps on the side that will line his pocket the best, he may have been surprised by the result, but he like many really underestimated how discriminatory a lot of our country is. Once he figured out what they were like, he thought he could latch on to that, to make himself a few quid.

I don't even know why you bother posting about Labour, it doesn't sound like you actually want them to win, and didn't support them in previous times when they did win, and you would rather the Tories won and Labour met your criteria. It's like someone being happy on death row, as long as they get their tasty meal before being put to the sword. You should think about what your priorities are, and for most people on here, that's get the Tories out however we can, then make gradual changes. You seem to want to get all the changes without going via the middle ground, which is impossible.

The party can't win if it moves to you instantly, so if you don't want the Tories you should either just vote for Labour and accept they're better than the Tories (which they always are), or vote for somebody else, just make sure you vote. If you try and drag the party away from the centre, when it's not in power, it will never get in power, not in the next decade at least. We need to curtail these far right clowns, before they drag other people further right, but we won't get it by being far left, there has to be a compromise, and then when we have power, then make changes.

 

[Andy_W]

As stu says, there is so much wrong with your posts on this thread Andy.

To dismiss Corbyn in the way you have is just plain wrong. 2017 showed clearly that at the very least his policies were seen as good policies. Polling on those policies alone clearly showed that.

In 2019 Johnson won lots of seats with a tiny majority, pushed over the line, not by brexit voters but by people fed up of brexit. Corbyns policy of another vote, whilst adult and grown up didn't appeal to a lot of people who were fed up with brexit dominating out politics.

To describe Johnson as anything other than a master political campaigner is just plain silly.

Johnson got the 2019 campaign right, Corbyn got it wrong. Nothing to do with good or bad leadership. Corbyn was a terrible campaigner he was a country mile away from being weak.

I disagree with him, and you, but you can both think what you like, I think I know quite well what the centre want (or my part at least), I've been there all my voting life. I know we need to win the centre to win too, something which some like to ignore.

The only people who thought JC's policies were good were those who voted for him (like me), it doesn't mean they thought he was a good leader (I didn't), I just thought I'd take any Labour over Tories, and he just didn't seem to fit the part as a PM. I could overlook that, and it wasn't a big deal at all to me, and give him a chance, but loads were scared of it. There was nowhere near enough people who liked him, his party and his policies to win, and it's winner takes all.

Then because he dithered for two years, and didn't make himself and the party crystal clear continually, he got absolutely hammered by the Tories in the next election. He got found out, just like BJ got found out, and sometimes that takes time.

People fed up by Brexit alone, would not switch sides from Labour to Tory, it takes a lot more than that, or at least it should do. They had retained pretty much all of the Brexit voters though, and would not have won without them. Labour needed top get some of those Brexit voters back, but didn't do it.

He was too slow to mention the vote on the deal or even another referendum (which looking back would have been a bad idea), or which type we went for, and this opinion wasn't made clear enough and often enough to the masses, and he was seen as a Eurosceptic anyway. He probably should have just said we're leaving, but's lets have a vote on the leave deal, maybe he did do that, I can't remember, but the fact I can't remember likely means it was not clear enough. It wasn't just him at fault mind, it was the makeup of the party too, they were too unrealistic.

Johnsons a clown, but like a lot of people, it takes some time before people realise that. Some realise it before/ straight away, which a lot of us on here did. He's not bad at campaigning, far better than Corbyn, but a lot of his tactics came from DC, who really does understand how to win votes, and which particular votes are needed to win, and the latter is more important.

A good leader should be able to campaign well, to be a PM it's a necessity, as they're a focal point, otherwise there's zero point in them being leader, unless they just want to lead the opposition forever, and never get in power, which is pointless when your direct opposition have a majority, or can make one.

 

[Lefty]

May had the highest approval ratings of any PM since records began when she called the 2017 election. People were confidently predicting a 200 seat majority. That you don't think she's a powerhouse now, is testament to Labour's performance in that election.

Give over.

However secure May was in the polls, it took an immediate hammer when she made the u-turn and called the election. A lot of people decided there and then to punish her just for that arrogance and hubris. That is a factor that was nothing to do with Labour/Corbyn. The terrible manifesto and campaign she fought added to that. Again, nothing to do with Labour or Corbyn.

Corbyn and Labour did fight an excellent campaign. There were two main factors in that. One was that the manifesto was a good one. The other was Corbyn performed well. Up until then he hadn't been given a fair crack of the whip by the media or the Labour Right. People had imagined he was all sorts of things, from a terrorist sympathiser to a communist spy who wanted to nationalise everything, leave NATO and abandon our Nuclear deterrent. Since 2015 Corbyn and the Project had been fighting on all fronts. Cameron and the MSM were painting him as an actual threat to the very fabric of the UK, while the PLP and a lot of the Party officials had either spat their dummy out and refusing to get behind him, or in the case of some, actively working against Corbyn. Disgraceful.

The one benefit of all that firefighting by the Project was that the Labour manifesto for 2017 had to be somewhat more of a compromise between all factions of the Party - it is a collaborative process - while appealing to the even more moderate population in general. It had to be as the Project had the Leader of the Party but not yet wrestled control of other echelons of the Party. This is an important point the Corbynites don't want to acknowledge.

Corbyn was an underdog who had been under attack even from his own people. He had been so busy for two years defending himself that people did not know what he was actually about, just what others had said. When he appeared relatively normal and not a threat, some people thought they would give him the benefit of the doubt, punish May's arrogance and support an underdog.

On the back of the 2017 success Corbyn and LOTO enacted a revenge purge, took control of the Party and policy. So from 2017-2019 everyone got a chance to see what these people represented, what they stood for and how competent they were. A lot changed their minds.

Which brings us to Brexit.

Who do you think Remainers voted for in 2017? Theresa May? Despite some misgivings, Labour were the only realisitic choice in most constituencies. That was a huge factor in the Labour vote, but the Left don't want to acknowledge that, they prefer to think it was all Corbyn. Lexiters even claimed that the 2017 vote for Labour was proof the vast majority of people wanted to leave the EU. They ignored the polls, ignored the marches, the petitions. It was an insult many wouldn't forgive, especially when added to the In June 2016, hardly anyone was passionately Remain. The longer it went, the better understood the deception and consequences, the more that changed. The Lexity Left forget, in their own bubble, millions marched on London. They remember the Stop The War march prior to Iraq, but there were TWO just as big for a People's vote that they pretend never happened. One petition had six million people sign it to revoke Brexit when they still couldn't agree what promises they would like to deliver. A lot of Remainers refused to vote Labour, many held their nose doing it tactically, in 2019.

 

[Laughing]

I disagree with him, and you, but you can both think what you like, I think I know quite well what the centre want (or my part at least), I've been there all my voting life. I know we need to win the centre to win too, something which some like to ignore.

The only people who thought JC's policies were good were those who voted for him (like me), it doesn't mean they thought he was a good leader (I didn't), I just thought I'd take any Labour over Tories, and he just didn't seem to fit the part as a PM. I could overlook that, and it wasn't a big deal at all to me, and give him a chance, but loads were scared of it. There was nowhere near enough people who liked him, his party and his policies to win, and it's winner takes all.

Then because he dithered for two years, and didn't make himself and the party crystal clear continually, he got absolutely hammered by the Tories in the next election. He got found out, just like BJ got found out, and sometimes that takes time.

People fed up by Brexit alone, would not switch sides from Labour to Tory, it takes a lot more than that, or at least it should do. They had retained pretty much all of the Brexit voters though, and would not have won without them. Labour needed top get some of those Brexit voters back, but didn't do it.

He was too slow to mention the vote on the deal or even another referendum (which looking back would have been a bad idea), or which type we went for, and this opinion wasn't made clear enough and often enough to the masses, and he was seen as a Eurosceptic anyway. He probably should have just said we're leaving, but's lets have a vote on the leave deal, maybe he did do that, I can't remember, but the fact I can't remember likely means it was not clear enough. It wasn't just him at fault mind, it was the makeup of the party too, they were too unrealistic.

Johnsons a clown, but like a lot of people, it takes some time before people realise that. Some realise it before/ straight away, which a lot of us on here did. He's not bad at campaigning, far better than Corbyn, but a lot of his tactics came from DC, who really does understand how to win votes, and which particular votes are needed to win, and the latter is more important.

A good leader should be able to campaign well, to be a PM it's a necessity, as they're a focal point, otherwise there's zero point in them being leader, unless they just want to lead the opposition forever, and never get in power, which is pointless when your direct opposition have a majority, or can make one.

It really doesn't matter whether you agree with me or not some of your statements are factually incorrect and some of your opinions don't stand up to scrutiny.

Firstly, lots of voters did vote tory to get brexit of the agenda. That was known straight after the 2019 election in a mori poll.

Secondly to call Corbyn weak or an ineffective leader because he can't campaign is rubbish. If that were true then Johnson must be a great leader as he is a great campaigner. Corbyn showed strength over and over again when the center of the party tried to oust him and he stood strong.

He was castigated in the press with lie after lie and had a Brexit stance that you call confused, it wasn't. It was crystal clear but the country didn't want another vote on brexit, they were exhausted and just wanted it done. That's a fact Andy.

 

[Andy_W]

It really doesn't matter whether you agree with me or not some of your statements are factually incorrect and some of your opinions don't stand up to scrutiny.

Firstly, lots of voters did vote tory to get brexit of the agenda. That was known straight after the 2019 election in a mori poll.

Secondly to call Corbyn weak or an ineffective leader because he can't campaign is rubbish. If that were true then Johnson must be a great leader as he is a great campaigner. Corbyn showed strength over and over again when the center of the party tried to oust him and he stood strong.

He was castigated in the press with lie after lie and had a Brexit stance that you call confused, it wasn't. It was crystal clear but the country didn't want another vote on brexit, they were exhausted and just wanted it done. That's a fact Andy.

Ok, whatever

Loads of remainers voted Labour in 2017 too (like me), which was me moving over to Labour after voting Lib Dem in 2010 and being taken for a Tory ride. I didn't vote in 2015 as I was just so annoyed at what had happened previous, but in hindsight I should have voted Labour then but was less up to speed with politics at that time as I was working out of the country.

This movement of reman voters from Lib Dem and even some Tories pumped up the perceived Corbyn vote, I know a few Tories who jumped ship so voted Labour when they saw that a good deal (as in staying in the SM and CU) was less likely to happen. Loads of them then moved back to Tory when they realised Corbyn had zero chance of doing anything to get a better version of Brexshit and they just saw zero chance of them winning an election, so ditched him as they did not see a Labour future with him at the helm. Whether they were right or wrong, is not up to me, I'm not them, but he was just too much for them to take (and an easy target for the media, it's sad but it's a fact), along with some of the people he chose in his cabinet, they moved back as soon as Corbyn went and they see Starmer as competent, and not an easy target.

Just because you can campaign does not make you a good leader for your party, that's your assumption not mine, but it's one skill that is absolutely necessary. Winning is one thing, but keeping it is another, and BJ's lies and incompetence for the party and UK have caused the failure of party, that's not good leadership.
Boris is just good at campaigning based on lies, or he was, but eventually liars get found out, and a liar won't ever make a good leader overall.
Boris is a good leader for him and some of his nut job mates mind, but certainly not all of his party (or who was in his party) and certainly not the UK, he's managed to line him and his mates pockets, so he led that right for those select few.

BJ's not interested in, or capable of, in leading in a way which would be good for their party for the long haul, he just wants short quick fixes, papering over massive cracks (that he helped create), and getting his profile higher. What he's probably not realised is that he's dog ****, and it's going to send his "reputation" through the floor, to those who actually thought he wasn't a clown. He won't care mind, as he'll end up richer, no matter what, as someone will throw him a bone, which he can put with his brown envelopes.

If the press were lying he should have sued them, over and over again, did he actually do this? I can't remember. He never made his stance clear on Brexit at all, clearly not as half of this board are questioning it, and even if/ when he did it was certainly not until it was far, far too late. You're proabably right about another referendum vote, but he could have just accepted brexit in 2019, but with SMA, and a CU, I don't think this would have been enough mind, but it would have got more than 202 seats.

He shouldn't have been put forward in 2017, as he was the wrong person to lead after the vote to leave. But even when he got in, he seemed to want his choice, rather than labours or the remainers. He should have been more pro EU in 2017/2018, looking for a confirmatory vote, or at least a vote on what deal, it wasn't liekly to happen, but that probably should have been his stance. It certainly wasn't going to happen in 2019 so he should have just accepted it (as should most of us remainers), and then 2019 should have just been based solely on paying for SMA. Staying in the SM was likely not an option as the brexiters would not have shifter back to labour if he was going for that.

It doesn't matter now anyway, at the end of the day he's gone, and I think Starmer has a better chance of winning an election than Corbyn, no matter what year that was.

 

[SuperStu]

you would rather the Tories won and Labour met your criteria

If the next election comes around in say 2024/25, and your dream result comes true and Labour get a majority, we'll have waited 15 years and all they'll have a mandate for is covid savings bonds. At that point the tories have won. They'll be sat with their feet up while Starmer consolidates everything they've done since 2010. Then the next election will come around and we'll lurch to the right again.

Incrementalism just doesn't work in my opinion Andy. It's been tried. It fails, always. Labour governments don't get bolder or more left wing the longer they're in. The opposite happens.

 

[BoroFur]

If the next election comes around in say 2024/25, and your dream result comes true and Labour get a majority, we'll have waited 15 years and all they'll have a mandate for is covid savings bonds. At that point the tories have won. They'll be sat with their feet up while Starmer consolidates everything they've done since 2010. Then the next election will come around and we'll lurch to the right again.

Incrementalism just doesn't work in my opinion Andy. It's been tried. It fails, always. Labour governments don't get bolder or more left wing the longer they're in. The opposite happens.

Clearly a Labour majority at the next GE is not your dream result then Stu.

 

[SuperStu]

Clearly a Labour majority at the next GE is not your dream result then Stu.

No it's not. I feel very ambivalent about it. What do you expect me to say? I don't think a Starmer led Labour government will change anything. Why would I be dreaming about that?

 

[Warwickboro]

Its not what I want, I repeat NOT what I want. But unfortunately for Labour to truly hammer this home by the next election, (don't forget by then we will have a new tory leader), they will have to change their stance on immigration. Please please please understand I do not want a tough stance on immigration AT ALL, but in order to win over gammon brittain, labour will absolutely have to change stance on this policy, and become tough on it, or they will get hammered again in 2 years with a new leader that says (we've changed)

 

[BoroFur]

No it's not. I feel very ambivalent about it. What do you expect me to say? I don't think a Starmer led Labour government will change anything. Why would I be dreaming about that?

Judging by your constant criticism of Starmer over the last two years I don't think you even know what the word ambivalent means. You patronise people by accusing them of 'dreaming' because their idea of Labour doesn't match your own ever so outdated, idealistic impression of what the 'real Labour' should look like.

I would imagine the only time you've been politically content is during a 5 year period and even then Labour was in opposition.

You keep on sniping but I'd caution you that bitterness is not good for your health and wellbeing.

 

[Zoophonic]

Private Eye sticking it into Boris in this weeks edition with its cartoons.

 

[Chris_Boro]

Its not what I want, I repeat NOT what I want. But unfortunately for Labour to truly hammer this home by the next election, (don't forget by then we will have a new tory leader), they will have to change their stance on immigration. Please please please understand I do not want a tough stance on immigration AT ALL, but in order to win over gammon brittain, labour will absolutely have to change stance on this policy, and become tough on it, or they will get hammered again in 2 years with a new leader that says (we've changed)

Because the Tory policy that's inhuman levels of toughness is working wonders.

Beyond deploying a fleet of type 52 destroyers a couple of nuclear submarines and an aircraft carrier to intercept rubber dinghy's, what do you define as "tough"?

Immigration has been used as a weapon and blown out of all proportions, the only way to limit people needing to come here is to stop causing the reasons for it in the first place.

 

[BoroFur]

That aged well Nadine

https://twitter.com/x/status/1004656199885836288

 

[Laughing]

Ok, whatever

Loads of remainers voted Labour in 2017 too (like me), which was me moving over to Labour after voting Lib Dem in 2010 and being taken for a Tory ride. I didn't vote in 2015 as I was just so annoyed at what had happened previous, but in hindsight I should have voted Labour then but was less up to speed with politics at that time as I was working out of the country.

This movement of reman voters from Lib Dem and even some Tories pumped up the perceived Corbyn vote, I know a few Tories who jumped ship so voted Labour when they saw that a good deal (as in staying in the SM and CU) was less likely to happen. Loads of them then moved back to Tory when they realised Corbyn had zero chance of doing anything to get a better version of Brexshit and they just saw zero chance of them winning an election, so ditched him as they did not see a Labour future with him at the helm. Whether they were right or wrong, is not up to me, I'm not them, but he was just too much for them to take (and an easy target for the media, it's sad but it's a fact), along with some of the people he chose in his cabinet, they moved back as soon as Corbyn went and they see Starmer as competent, and not an easy target.

Just because you can campaign does not make you a good leader for your party, that's your assumption not mine, but it's one skill that is absolutely necessary. Winning is one thing, but keeping it is another, and BJ's lies and incompetence for the party and UK have caused the failure of party, that's not good leadership.
Boris is just good at campaigning based on lies, or he was, but eventually liars get found out, and a liar won't ever make a good leader overall.
Boris is a good leader for him and some of his nut job mates mind, but certainly not all of his party (or who was in his party) and certainly not the UK, he's managed to line him and his mates pockets, so he led that right for those select few.

BJ's not interested in, or capable of, in leading in a way which would be good for their party for the long haul, he just wants short quick fixes, papering over massive cracks (that he helped create), and getting his profile higher. What he's probably not realised is that he's dog ****, and it's going to send his "reputation" through the floor, to those who actually thought he wasn't a clown. He won't care mind, as he'll end up richer, no matter what, as someone will throw him a bone, which he can put with his brown envelopes.

If the press were lying he should have sued them, over and over again, did he actually do this? I can't remember. He never made his stance clear on Brexit at all, clearly not as half of this board are questioning it, and even if/ when he did it was certainly not until it was far, far too late. You're proabably right about another referendum vote, but he could have just accepted brexit in 2019, but with SMA, and a CU, I don't think this would have been enough mind, but it would have got more than 202 seats.

He shouldn't have been put forward in 2017, as he was the wrong person to lead after the vote to leave. But even when he got in, he seemed to want his choice, rather than labours or the remainers. He should have been more pro EU in 2017/2018, looking for a confirmatory vote, or at least a vote on what deal, it wasn't liekly to happen, but that probably should have been his stance. It certainly wasn't going to happen in 2019 so he should have just accepted it (as should most of us remainers), and then 2019 should have just been based solely on paying for SMA. Staying in the SM was likely not an option as the brexiters would not have shifter back to labour if he was going for that.

It doesn't matter now anyway, at the end of the day he's gone, and I think Starmer has a better chance of winning an election than Corbyn, no matter what year that was.

I don't disagree with some of that Andy, but it's very subjective. That's OK and vive Le difference, it makes life interesting.

You may well know voters who support your opinion, it's why you formed your opinion. It's not very accurate though.

There was a clear movement, of seeing voters to tory in 2019 based on the attrition of brexit. Its a fact. That with Corbyns one more referendum did for him. It wasn't he was weak, it was people were fed up. "ok **** it, let's move on". That's a fact, supported by a mori poll after the election. Those numbers gave Johnson his majority, which I say again, he won lots of seats with a tiny majority.

Tories were never going to sustain that, even had they been competent.

 

[BiggEggo]

Surely you would be expecting MP's to be going the other way with all the great things Johnson is delivering.....
Levelling Up
40 new hospitals
£350m extra to the NHS every week
20k more police
Record employment levels
Wages up - especially nurses
Best economic growth of G7 nations
World beating vaccines and booster program.
Trade deals left right and centre
Got Brexit done.

Johnson is truly a man of his word - given his word has always been Lie. Whoever would have thought this - apart from anyone who has a brain.

 

[Lefty]

It really doesn't matter whether you agree with me or not some of your statements are factually incorrect and some of your opinions don't stand up to scrutiny.

Firstly, lots of voters did vote tory to get brexit of the agenda. That was known straight after the 2019 election in a mori poll.

Secondly to call Corbyn weak or an ineffective leader because he can't campaign is rubbish. If that were true then Johnson must be a great leader as he is a great campaigner. Corbyn showed strength over and over again when the center of the party tried to oust him and he stood strong.

He was castigated in the press with lie after lie and had a Brexit stance that you call confused, it wasn't. It was crystal clear but the country didn't want another vote on brexit, they were exhausted and just wanted it done. That's a fact Andy.

Crystal clear on Brexit? That is just wrong.

November 2019

 

[SuperStu]

Judging by your constant criticism of Starmer over the last two years I don't think you even know what the word ambivalent means.

Ambivalent about an election outcome while this is what the Labour party is. Happy to admit I'm not ambivalent about having a left wing option in out national politics.

bitterness is not good for your health and wellbeing.

Thanks for your concern.

 

[Warwickboro]

Because the Tory policy that's inhuman levels of toughness is working wonders.

Beyond deploying a fleet of type 52 destroyers a couple of nuclear submarines and an aircraft carrier to intercept rubber dinghy's, what do you define as "tough"?

Immigration has been used as a weapon and blown out of all proportions, the only way to limit people needing to come here is to stop causing the reasons for it in the first place.

I agree, totally and utterly, but the Conservatives can't make it about the economy anymore, they blew that up! So they WILL, make this about immigration, Labour must be ready to take a different stance to the usual one, I hate it, but to win, it will boil down to this, and the language they use. If they make the mistake of thinking the British public will see past the whole thing and realise it is designed to divide us with hate, then they are wrong. It will all be about immigration and if Labour appear to be pro or soft on it they will lose, much to my dismay.

 

[SmallTown]

I agree, totally and utterly, but the Conservatives can't make it about the economy anymore, they blew that up! So they WILL, make this about immigration, Labour must be ready to take a different stance to the usual one, I hate it, but to win, it will boil down to this, and the language they use. If they make the mistake of thinking the British public will see past the whole thing and realise it is designed to divide us with hate, then they are wrong. It will all be about immigration and if Labour appear to be pro or soft on it they will lose, much to my dismay.

I have a sinking feeling you're right on this.

Brexit has taught is there is a huge scummy underclass of bigots in this country who will abandon any principle they have if it means less people with funny accents.

What a depressing thought

 

[Lefty]

I'm not sure immigration has the cut through it had in 2016.

The last few years have reminded people of their value.