cashead wrote:
Yeah, but worthless ain't gonna cut it when you're in opposition.
We saw the same thing in NZ, which seems to be the Crosby-Textor beta test political scene, where we had our own Tory scum PM with a carefully manufactured buffoon act stay in power while being actively harmful to the nation.
NZ Labour managed to tip the scales in their favour when they installed a leader that had massive public appeal, and used CT tactics against the government, which was wrapped up in a message of relentless positivity.
There's also something to be said in often speaking publicly in easy-to-digest soundbites. "Oven Ready Brexit." "Get Brexit Done." Like, you knew exactly what they were trying to sell. Compare that to "It's time for a real change," which J-Corbz evidently thought was a real vote winner. The fuck does it even mean? It's bland, vague and it sounds so generic.
There are a lot of other factors, mind, like FPP being the shittiest shitty shit voting system that was ever shat out by a bunch of shits that know fuck about shit, or the complete lack of party discipline in 2019 - I hope Mumbly Joe or Sir Kevin or whatever he calls him self has managed to keep a lid on that sort of thing.
Yes, that's a good tactic. Unfortunately none of the candidates had it.
Ardern isn't someone that popped in out of nowhere. She succeeded Andrew Little, who was able to unite the caucus (credit should go to his first deputy, Annette King, who had connections across the various factions, and helped unite them under his banner), and when she retired, he promoted Ardern as his deputy. Early on, she was pegged as a potential future Party Leader, and it's just that it came a lot sooner than anyone had expected.
Surely there's someone similar who's young and has been pegged for big things down the line?
The closest they have is probably Nadia Whittome and there's no way that the party machinery at large will let someone with that many principles near the leadership. They learned the lesson from Blair that the *only* way to power was to occupy the centre ground as hard as you can.
Son of Mathonwy wrote:
Yes, that's a good tactic. Unfortunately none of the candidates had it.
Ardern isn't someone that popped in out of nowhere. She succeeded Andrew Little, who was able to unite the caucus (credit should go to his first deputy, Annette King, who had connections across the various factions, and helped unite them under his banner), and when she retired, he promoted Ardern as his deputy. Early on, she was pegged as a potential future Party Leader, and it's just that it came a lot sooner than anyone had expected.
Surely there's someone similar who's young and has been pegged for big things down the line?
The closest they have is probably Nadia Whittome and there's no way that the party machinery at large will let someone with that many principles near the leadership. They learned the lesson from Blair that the *only* way to power was to occupy the centre ground as hard as you can.
Puja
That's the problem. Starmer DOES have principles, but it's the team behind him that's crap. Someone else I think is good is Clive Lewis - what's happened to him?
But it's the system behind it that's broken. The UK needs a new party to come along and brief against the civil service, basically. The amount of waste and corruption is huge and someone could come along and win votes simply by being "not political elite".
Sure, they'd need funding from somewhere, but I think you'd be surprised by how little they'd actually need.
cashead wrote:
Ardern isn't someone that popped in out of nowhere. She succeeded Andrew Little, who was able to unite the caucus (credit should go to his first deputy, Annette King, who had connections across the various factions, and helped unite them under his banner), and when she retired, he promoted Ardern as his deputy. Early on, she was pegged as a potential future Party Leader, and it's just that it came a lot sooner than anyone had expected.
Surely there's someone similar who's young and has been pegged for big things down the line?
The closest they have is probably Nadia Whittome and there's no way that the party machinery at large will let someone with that many principles near the leadership. They learned the lesson from Blair that the *only* way to power was to occupy the centre ground as hard as you can.
Puja
That's the problem. Starmer DOES have principles, but it's the team behind him that's crap. Someone else I think is good is Clive Lewis - what's happened to him?
But it's the system behind it that's broken. The UK needs a new party to come along and brief against the civil service, basically. The amount of waste and corruption is huge and someone could come along and win votes simply by being "not political elite".
Sure, they'd need funding from somewhere, but I think you'd be surprised by how little they'd actually need.
Many good Labour politicians abandoned ship during the Corbyn era.
Puja wrote:
The closest they have is probably Nadia Whittome and there's no way that the party machinery at large will let someone with that many principles near the leadership. They learned the lesson from Blair that the *only* way to power was to occupy the centre ground as hard as you can.
Puja
That's the problem. Starmer DOES have principles, but it's the team behind him that's crap. Someone else I think is good is Clive Lewis - what's happened to him?
But it's the system behind it that's broken. The UK needs a new party to come along and brief against the civil service, basically. The amount of waste and corruption is huge and someone could come along and win votes simply by being "not political elite".
Sure, they'd need funding from somewhere, but I think you'd be surprised by how little they'd actually need.
Many good Labour politicians abandoned ship during the Corbyn era.
Yep, and I'm sure Chuka and the rest have some regrers about self-destructing their careers.
Stom wrote:
That's the problem. Starmer DOES have principles, but it's the team behind him that's crap. Someone else I think is good is Clive Lewis - what's happened to him?
But it's the system behind it that's broken. The UK needs a new party to come along and brief against the civil service, basically. The amount of waste and corruption is huge and someone could come along and win votes simply by being "not political elite".
Sure, they'd need funding from somewhere, but I think you'd be surprised by how little they'd actually need.
Many good Labour politicians abandoned ship during the Corbyn era.
Yep, and I'm sure Chuka and the rest have some regrers about self-destructing their careers.
Chucka wasn’t one of the ones I was thinking of but you could include him and the others who moved to other parties.
Puja wrote:
The closest they have is probably Nadia Whittome and there's no way that the party machinery at large will let someone with that many principles near the leadership. They learned the lesson from Blair that the *only* way to power was to occupy the centre ground as hard as you can.
Puja
The pro-remain individual who spent the referendum criticising the EU? Doesn't scream an astute leader of campaigns. Also she's so far proved something of a quitter, albeit she's obviously very young.
Puja wrote:
The closest they have is probably Nadia Whittome and there's no way that the party machinery at large will let someone with that many principles near the leadership. They learned the lesson from Blair that the *only* way to power was to occupy the centre ground as hard as you can.
Puja
The pro-remain individual who spent the referendum criticising the EU? Doesn't scream an astute leader of campaigns. Also she's so far proved something of a quitter, albeit she's obviously very young.
Go on, I'll bite - tell me how she's "something of a quitter".
Puja wrote:
The closest they have is probably Nadia Whittome and there's no way that the party machinery at large will let someone with that many principles near the leadership. They learned the lesson from Blair that the *only* way to power was to occupy the centre ground as hard as you can.
Puja
The pro-remain individual who spent the referendum criticising the EU? Doesn't scream an astute leader of campaigns. Also she's so far proved something of a quitter, albeit she's obviously very young.
Go on, I'll bite - tell me how she's "something of a quitter".
Puja
She starts projects with I think genuine interest and then rather lets them drift. Which I know from a family member who works with her, and actually is very fond of her. Works with is a bit of a stretch as she's at the local uni, is also rather on the left, and is one of the student volunteers, that person doesn't have much issue with the assignment of tasks which just get abandoned
Perhaps with experience she'll better learn what to get involved in from the off, and too build a more trusted staff who don't bring you what in essence is click-bait
But her campaigning to remain by getting stuck into the EU is something I sort of remember with fondness for the stupidity of it
The late move on the amendment from the government on caps for social care isn't welcome, it seems poorly (unfairly?) thought out, and asking MPs to vote on it today prior to publishing distributional impact assessments by the Treasury underhand. So about par for the course
Having an issue with needing to show ID to vote is such a weird thing. No other country would have a problem with that.
It's not a problem if everyone already has national ID cards*.
* Not that I'm arguing for that.
I have to say, the one thing that put me in favour of national ID cards is reading about the Estonian system where you can vote by internet. That would be a massive increase in the ability to vote and it's just not doable without a pre-existing ID card system. Mind, I wouldn't trust anyone in this country to deliver a solid government-commissioned IT project of that size anyway, given previous experience.
It's not just the UK though - lots of countries don't need ID to vote, as a sizeable chunk of people don't have photo ID and they tend to be the ones in most need of representation.
Puja wrote:
It's not just the UK though - lots of countries don't need ID to vote, as a sizeable chunk of people don't have photo ID and they tend to be the ones in most need of representation.
Which is why it's a bad thing here and in the US - which is also why the right in both countries, really want it.
Zhivago wrote:
Having an issue with needing to show ID to vote is such a weird thing. No other country would have a problem with that.
It's not a problem if everyone already has national ID cards*.
* Not that I'm arguing for that.
I have to say, the one thing that put me in favour of national ID cards is reading about the Estonian system where you can vote by internet. That would be a massive increase in the ability to vote and it's just not doable without a pre-existing ID card system. Mind, I wouldn't trust anyone in this country to deliver a solid government-commissioned IT project of that size anyway, given previous experience.
It's not just the UK though - lots of countries don't need ID to vote, as a sizeable chunk of people don't have photo ID and they tend to be the ones in most need of representation.
Puja
ID cards should have happened in the UK. Now, though, I don't see the point, it wouldn't be accepted in lieu of a passport for travel to Europe, so we'd still need to carry a passport. My wife has no chance to forget her ID when traveling, as it's a small card that lives in her wallet, like a driving license. And as everyone needs it and can get one easily, it's not exactly a bad thing...
That's a huge swing, and as ever, voting is down for a byelection versus general; but it's worth noting that the leftish vote (Lab + LD + Green) still saw a frank increase in numbers compared to the the GE19 (by about 20%), despite overall votes dropping.
Of course it's a protest vote, and will almost certainly return to blue at a GE with a new leader - but it's still one hell of an indication of the dissatisfaction in the country.
Which Tyler wrote:That's a huge swing, and as ever, voting is down for a byelection versus general; but it's worth noting that the leftish vote (Lab + LD + Green) still saw a frank increase in numbers compared to the the GE19 (by about 20%), despite overall votes dropping.
Of course it's a protest vote, and will almost certainly return to blue at a GE with a new leader - but it's still one hell of an indication of the dissatisfaction in the country.
And there’s no way to blame ReformUK or UKIP for this one. Quite clearly this is a huge protest vote.
Not that it’s a great result either for Labour but one thinks there’s a lot of tactical voting going on here. Perhaps at hint at maybe an agreement between Labour and the Liberals in English and Welsh seats might not be such a terrible idea? The next election could be surprising close if the fixed term parliaments are revoked and Johnson continues like this.