Latest Kantar poll - Tories 13 points ahead

bumface said:
It really isn't but I'm not going to get in to an argument with you here mate. RLB would have been infinitely better and more effective and trustworthy than Sir Keith Stalin.
Click to expand...

Andy Burnham would have been a great choice if he stood. Not sure what the rules are though with him not being a sitting MP.
 
If the left weren't trying to undermine Starmer he wouldn't have to be getting the team in shape for an election. If he fails to make the Labour Party work as one they will lose the next election. I'm with festa5 on this, I would vote for a coalition of Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Minh and Fidel Castro before I voted blue. The in fighting in Labour is dispiriting but better now than during an election campaign.

I firmly believe that Labour must enter an electoral pact with the Lib Dems and the SNP to get the Tories out and that should be on a basis of electoral reform to allow full proportional representation rather than first past the post which consistently favours the blue minority. Yes, I accept that it might mean UKIP (or similar RWNJs) as MPs but would also mean Green MPs and possibly even far left representation and would definitely mean a succession of coalition governments. At the moment the far right tail of the Conservative Party is "wagging the dog" of the government and we got an extreme Brexit and cronyism.

It's no good the left going on about what was done to Corbyn, yeah it was shidty but know your true enemy and the enemy of the people the Tories, Anuerin Bevan had it right in 1950
"So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin," he went on. "They condemned millions of people to semi-starvation. I warn you young men and women, do not listen to what they are saying, do not listen to the seductions of Lord Woolton. They have not changed, or if they have they are slightly worse. The weak first; and the strong next." Mr. Churchill preferred a free-for-all, but what was Toryism except organised Spivvery?"
Click to expand...
We have learned nothing.
 
Otto42 said:
Surely he deserves a go in front of the electorate then we can judge properly. That should happen in 2023. Constantly changing Labour leader is a bit like constantly changing Boro manager. I didn't particularly like it when Blairites tried to oust Corbyn, even though I would class myself as a Blairite. Constant Labour division only serves to result in more Tory rule.
Click to expand...
Maybe so but unless he “grows a pair“ very quickly and starts getting into the Tories and starts surrounding himself with far better MP’s than that poor excuse for one on question time then the Tories will walk the next election.
 
Ex pfc wintergreen said:
Labour are better at infighting than fighting the opposition, whether the lefties like it or not, a centrist with a personality is what's needed to get the red wall and the floating voters back.
Click to expand...
So someone like Johnson then?

Vacuous ✅
Liar ✅
Serial adulterer ✅
Opportunist ✅
Work-shy ✅
Freeloader ✅
Racist ✅
Elitist ✅

That sort of a personality?
 
bear66 said:
The rules don't seem to stipulate that they need to be an MP. Also the Prime Minister doesn't have to be an MP.
Click to expand...

I suspected that but wonder how it works with a seat in the Commons etc? Labour might have to have a HoC Leader like the SNP do?

Anyway, it won't happen I suppose but it is interesting.
 
Muttley said:
If the left weren't trying to undermine Starmer he wouldn't have to be getting the team in shape for an election.
Click to expand...

No idea what you're getting at there Muttley. Tbh I think it's quite surprising how little "the left" have pushed back while Starmer has been leader. The SCG MPs really haven't done anything in reaction to all the policy reversals, membership purges, and Corbyn's whip withdrawl. A few open letters on twitter but otherwise?

And you're saying if they hadn't done that much, Starmer wouldn't need to prepare for an election? :unsure: I think I must be misunderstanding you. Of course he would. That's the job.

Muttley said:
I firmly believe that Labour must enter an electoral pact with the Lib Dems and the SNP to get the Tories out and that should be on a basis of electoral reform to allow full proportional representation rather than first past the post which consistently favours the blue minority.
Click to expand...

Have the SNP actually said they'd support a coalition on PR elections? They'd lose a bunch of their seats wouldn't they? Their support probably hinges on getting their 2nd indy ref.

Lib Dems obviously can't be relied on.

I think working more closely with the Greens and Plaid is probably Labours best bet on that front.

Muttley said:
It's no good the left going on about what was done to Corbyn,
Click to expand...

TBH I don't really think the left are going on about that much these days. It's more the contemporary stuff that Starmer's doing to the left in the party now. It's no good telling one side of the party they have to know their enemy, while just a few weeks ago at conference Starmer was devoting himself to internal party process changes against the left. 🤷‍♂️
 
Muttley said:
If the left weren't trying to undermine Starmer he wouldn't have to be getting the team in shape for an election. If he fails to make the Labour Party work as one they will lose the next election. I'm with festa5 on this, I would vote for a coalition of Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Minh and Fidel Castro before I voted blue. The in fighting in Labour is dispiriting but better now than during an election campaign.

I firmly believe that Labour must enter an electoral pact with the Lib Dems and the SNP to get the Tories out and that should be on a basis of electoral reform to allow full proportional representation rather than first past the post which consistently favours the blue minority. Yes, I accept that it might mean UKIP (or similar RWNJs) as MPs but would also mean Green MPs and possibly even far left representation and would definitely mean a succession of coalition governments. At the moment the far right tail of the Conservative Party is "wagging the dog" of the government and we got an extreme Brexit and cronyism.

It's no good the left going on about what was done to Corbyn, yeah it was shidty but know your true enemy and the enemy of the people the Tories, Anuerin Bevan had it right in 1950

We have learned nothing.
Click to expand...
I agree that there has to be an anti-Tory coalition, it has and always will be the majority of the voters, but in the last 100 years we have had nearly 70 years of Tory rule :mad:
 
Billy69_uk said:
Labour wishes it was only a million miles away from government.

The Labour party are "almost" as complicit as the Tories are, in the current fiasco this country is currently experiencing.
Click to expand...
sorry I'm not having that, this government made it's strategic decision that led here, it made the decision for a brexit referendum with no formulated plan for how to gain value. This government enacted Austerity for 10 years putting the squeeze on ordinary people, normalising low wages and zero hour contracts, the war on truth, the xenophobia. Labour are not complicit in this at all. The people complicit are the billionaires donating money, the media, foreign powers such as Russia.

Yes the left have been in conflict with each other, but they are in no way complicit for teh above, the left all disagree with it, they just don't agree the best way to combat it
 
BoroFur said:
Why change the thread title?
Click to expand...

I was thinking this, why not change the thread title to any of the following with smaller Tory leads?...

Opinium +4
R&W +4
Survation +4
Savanta +5

All the polls are weighed based largely on the 2019 GE result and 2016 Brexit vote with a 2 to 4 point margin of error.

This could mean a huge swing one way or another, especially as the next election won't be a 1 issue election like the last.
 
Laughing said:
Whenever we get on to starmer you have a face like a slapped ****!

I like that one!
Click to expand...
I'm glad that your thinly veiled racism towards my people amuses you Laughing. There's only about four of us on here who can see Starmer for what he really is and you disagree with us and that's fine, obviously. But there's no need to then make a personal attack on me for having a bum for a face. Shocking that you think that that's acceptable behaviour. I thought that you were better than that mate.
 
MolteniArcore said:
Andy Burnham would have been a great choice if he stood. Not sure what the rules are though with him not being a sitting MP.
Click to expand...
bear66 said:
The rules don't seem to stipulate that they need to be an MP. Also the Prime Minister doesn't have to be an MP.
Click to expand...

The Labour Party Rulebook states that the Leader and Deputy Leader have to be elected "from among Commons members of the PLP", i.e. they have to be Labour MPs.

Andy Burnham is the obvious next leader of the party, and could give it real political leadership, but he'd need to get (re)elected as an MP first. I reckon Keir Starmer wouldn't be too keen on seeing his name on any by-election shortlists in the near future.
 
bumface said:
I'm glad that your thinly veiled racism towards my people amuses you Laughing. There's only about four of us on here who can see Starmer for what he really is and you disagree with us and that's fine, obviously. But there's no need to then make a personal attack on me for having a bum for a face. Shocking that you think that that's acceptable behaviour. I thought that you were better than that mate.
Click to expand...
Now I feel bad for you. A bit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top