Snap General Election called - The new UK Politics thread

[Stom]

Sounds like a clusterfuck from all directions, tbh - Sultana boycotted day 1 because Corbyn et al banned a chunk of her supporters from being part of the party under very shaky pretences (a rule which didn't appear to apply to them and has subsequently been repealed at the convention). Very much gives the impression of the experienced organiser Corbyn using nous and procedure to bury a rival - her very public response makes her look naive and unprofessional, he looks dastardly and engaging in traditional leftie-on-leftie-violence, and neither of them look like they should be trusted with running a 20 yard dash, let alone a political party.

It is impressive that they've sorted out having wings to infight with before they've even worked out any policies.

Puja

Honestly...I don't understand why you would vote for YP when the Greens are available? They are just a clusterfuck, and offer no real solutions other than infighting.

Corbyn has shown his level, where he is at, and, honestly, it's not good. It's out of touch, and it's not nice, either.

For me, unless there is an early election, I won't be able to vote next time round anyway...

Indeed. They had a chance to become the new Left wing party if they had moved quicker and got themselves set up and vaguely competent before the Green party leadership election, but now Polanski has very firmly established the Greens as a genuine political forc. As a result, I'm not really sure what unfulfilled niche YP think they need to serve (aside from Corbyn's ego, of course).

I suspect Sultana will probably end up quitting in frustration/when Corbyn inevitably throws trans people under the bus to placate the Independent Alliance MPs and will end up joining the Greens, who do fit her values fairly well. Jamie Driscoll (ex-North of Tyne mayor, fairly influential figure in the Labour left until stitched up and forced out by Starmer, and part of the group behind the organising and founding of Your Party) has already gone that route and I can't see Sultana lasting much longer.

Incidentally, I am impressed with some of the work that the Greens are doing to acquire competent people. As Reform have demonstrated with their racists, incompetents, teenagers, or just plan paper candidates getting elected as councillors and fucking everything up, the hardest part of being an insurgent political party is getting together enough competent people to stand as candidates for election. The Greens already have a large bank of people who have been with the party and working in local politics for decades, but they're also poaching a lot of figures from the left of Labour - not outright MPs (yet, although I suspect some will be coming if Starmer doesn't pull out of his death spiral of appeasing Reform), but councillors, local organisers, potential MPs who were deselected and blocked by Starmer's clique. Whether it'll be enough, I don't know, but it's at least showing forward thinking.

Puja

The problem is that Corbyn seemingly has it in his head that he’s electable, when if he hadn’t been Labour leader, he wouldn’t have been. When it’s just him, it’s not like he’s Bernie Sanders… he’s literally the definition of what is wrong with the left.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Honestly...I don't understand why you would vote for YP when the Greens are available? They are just a clusterfuck, and offer no real solutions other than infighting.

Corbyn has shown his level, where he is at, and, honestly, it's not good. It's out of touch, and it's not nice, either.

For me, unless there is an early election, I won't be able to vote next time round anyway...

Indeed. They had a chance to become the new Left wing party if they had moved quicker and got themselves set up and vaguely competent before the Green party leadership election, but now Polanski has very firmly established the Greens as a genuine political forc. As a result, I'm not really sure what unfulfilled niche YP think they need to serve (aside from Corbyn's ego, of course).

I suspect Sultana will probably end up quitting in frustration/when Corbyn inevitably throws trans people under the bus to placate the Independent Alliance MPs and will end up joining the Greens, who do fit her values fairly well. Jamie Driscoll (ex-North of Tyne mayor, fairly influential figure in the Labour left until stitched up and forced out by Starmer, and part of the group behind the organising and founding of Your Party) has already gone that route and I can't see Sultana lasting much longer.

Incidentally, I am impressed with some of the work that the Greens are doing to acquire competent people. As Reform have demonstrated with their racists, incompetents, teenagers, or just plan paper candidates getting elected as councillors and fucking everything up, the hardest part of being an insurgent political party is getting together enough competent people to stand as candidates for election. The Greens already have a large bank of people who have been with the party and working in local politics for decades, but they're also poaching a lot of figures from the left of Labour - not outright MPs (yet, although I suspect some will be coming if Starmer doesn't pull out of his death spiral of appeasing Reform), but councillors, local organisers, potential MPs who were deselected and blocked by Starmer's clique. Whether it'll be enough, I don't know, but it's at least showing forward thinking.

Puja

The problem is that Corbyn seemingly has it in his head that he’s electable, when if he hadn’t been Labour leader, he wouldn’t have been. When it’s just him, it’s not like he’s Bernie Sanders… he’s literally the definition of what is wrong with the left.

YP has squandered much of its potential into that brief window before Polanski got himself started (mostly IMO because of Sultana). However:

1) The conference was not the shambles the media enjoyed portraying it as,
2) There's a very interesting experiment in democratic politics taking place in YP which may yet lead to interesting places,
3) YP may well fit a useful niche of picking up the harder left, working class and Muslim votes which the Greens might not be able to reach,
4) IF IF IF YP and the Greens can work together, they might be a force.

Clearly (okay . . . IMO) the Greens are the sensible voting option for the left at the moment. I would vote Green in a GE tomorrow. But the GE is years away and by that point things could change making either a more left-wing Labour party or YP better options.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Shock: Labour have an animal welfare policy I agree with:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/ ... es-england

[Sandydragon]

Indeed. They had a chance to become the new Left wing party if they had moved quicker and got themselves set up and vaguely competent before the Green party leadership election, but now Polanski has very firmly established the Greens as a genuine political forc. As a result, I'm not really sure what unfulfilled niche YP think they need to serve (aside from Corbyn's ego, of course).

I suspect Sultana will probably end up quitting in frustration/when Corbyn inevitably throws trans people under the bus to placate the Independent Alliance MPs and will end up joining the Greens, who do fit her values fairly well. Jamie Driscoll (ex-North of Tyne mayor, fairly influential figure in the Labour left until stitched up and forced out by Starmer, and part of the group behind the organising and founding of Your Party) has already gone that route and I can't see Sultana lasting much longer.

Incidentally, I am impressed with some of the work that the Greens are doing to acquire competent people. As Reform have demonstrated with their racists, incompetents, teenagers, or just plan paper candidates getting elected as councillors and fucking everything up, the hardest part of being an insurgent political party is getting together enough competent people to stand as candidates for election. The Greens already have a large bank of people who have been with the party and working in local politics for decades, but they're also poaching a lot of figures from the left of Labour - not outright MPs (yet, although I suspect some will be coming if Starmer doesn't pull out of his death spiral of appeasing Reform), but councillors, local organisers, potential MPs who were deselected and blocked by Starmer's clique. Whether it'll be enough, I don't know, but it's at least showing forward thinking.

Puja

The problem is that Corbyn seemingly has it in his head that he’s electable, when if he hadn’t been Labour leader, he wouldn’t have been. When it’s just him, it’s not like he’s Bernie Sanders… he’s literally the definition of what is wrong with the left.

YP has squandered much of its potential into that brief window before Polanski got himself started (mostly IMO because of Sultana). However:

1) The conference was not the shambles the media enjoyed portraying it as,
2) There's a very interesting experiment in democratic politics taking place in YP which may yet lead to interesting places,
3) YP may well fit a useful niche of picking up the harder left, working class and Muslim votes which the Greens might not be able to reach,
4) IF IF IF YP and the Greens can work together, they might be a force.

Clearly (okay . . . IMO) the Greens are the sensible voting option for the left at the moment. I would vote Green in a GE tomorrow. But the GE is years away and by that point things could change making either a more left-wing Labour party or YP better options.

Polanski was interviewed by The Rest Is Politics and came off very badly. If he wants to be taken seriously towards the business end of a parliament then he needs to be able to field some basic probing questions.

[Son of Mathonwy]

The problem is that Corbyn seemingly has it in his head that he’s electable, when if he hadn’t been Labour leader, he wouldn’t have been. When it’s just him, it’s not like he’s Bernie Sanders… he’s literally the definition of what is wrong with the left.

YP has squandered much of its potential into that brief window before Polanski got himself started (mostly IMO because of Sultana). However:

1) The conference was not the shambles the media enjoyed portraying it as,
2) There's a very interesting experiment in democratic politics taking place in YP which may yet lead to interesting places,
3) YP may well fit a useful niche of picking up the harder left, working class and Muslim votes which the Greens might not be able to reach,
4) IF IF IF YP and the Greens can work together, they might be a force.

Clearly (okay . . . IMO) the Greens are the sensible voting option for the left at the moment. I would vote Green in a GE tomorrow. But the GE is years away and by that point things could change making either a more left-wing Labour party or YP better options.

Polanski was interviewed by The Rest Is Politics and came off very badly. If he wants to be taken seriously towards the business end of a parliament then he needs to be able to field some basic probing questions.

Yeah, well I'd take him over a never-was Tory and a war crime enabler any time. I will admit haven't seen it all (I can't bear the idea of watching that chummy Blairite and Tory combo); I've only seen a clip of Polanski not being quite as slick as usual when quizzed on economics. Tricky one, obviously I'd like him to have been a bit surer of his ground but it was more of an ambush than an interview. You don't expect to be tested on facts (that Rory Stuart Googled before the show) in this kind of thing, it's more about your opinions and what you intend to do. There are a whole lot of numbers you could in theory ask of a party leader but they can hardly be expected to be as well prepared on them than a cabinet minister would be about their department.

[Which Tyler]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/ ... et-honours

The Red Roses’ World Cup success on home soil has led to the captain, Zoe Aldcroft, the vice-captain, Marlie Packer, and the head coach, John Mitchell, named OBEs, while Megan Jones, Sadia Kabeya and Ellie Kildunne become MBEs.

NB: 31 of the men's 2003 squad were honoured.
CBE for Johnson.
OBE for Wilkinson and Leonard.
MBE for every other player.
Whilst Woodward got a knighthood.

This world cup win (and grand slam) is no less of an achievement, but 1/6 as recognised

[Stom]

YP has squandered much of its potential into that brief window before Polanski got himself started (mostly IMO because of Sultana). However:

1) The conference was not the shambles the media enjoyed portraying it as,
2) There's a very interesting experiment in democratic politics taking place in YP which may yet lead to interesting places,
3) YP may well fit a useful niche of picking up the harder left, working class and Muslim votes which the Greens might not be able to reach,
4) IF IF IF YP and the Greens can work together, they might be a force.

Clearly (okay . . . IMO) the Greens are the sensible voting option for the left at the moment. I would vote Green in a GE tomorrow. But the GE is years away and by that point things could change making either a more left-wing Labour party or YP better options.

Polanski was interviewed by The Rest Is Politics and came off very badly. If he wants to be taken seriously towards the business end of a parliament then he needs to be able to field some basic probing questions.

Yeah, well I'd take him over a never-was Tory and a war crime enabler any time. I will admit haven't seen it all (I can't bear the idea of watching that chummy Blairite and Tory combo); I've only seen a clip of Polanski not being quite as slick as usual when quizzed on economics. Tricky one, obviously I'd like him to have been a bit surer of his ground but it was more of an ambush than an interview. You don't expect to be tested on facts (that Rory Stuart Googled before the show) in this kind of thing, it's more about your opinions and what you intend to do. There are a whole lot of numbers you could in theory ask of a party leader but they can hardly be expected to be as well prepared on them than a cabinet minister would be about their department.

There's more to it... I never had a dislike of TRIP pair, I even liked Stewart somewhat many years ago.

BUT

The interview with Gary Stevenson, and then the Polanski one were (attempted) hatchet jobs. They want one thing and one thing only: protect the system and protect the way it's always been done.

There's no sentiment for tearing it up, despite the fact that's what the country (the world, even) needs. A force to come in and rip up the political and economic systems that are creating this inequality and making the rich insanely rich and insanely powerful.

You may not like him, but Yanis Varoufakis is nothing if not a well learned economist. Hearing him talk about technofeudalism so strongly is...well, you should listen to him a bit.

Add in the work of Stevenson and Gabriel Zucman, and Richard Murphy on trying to explain economics from outside of the neo-liberal PoV, and you can start to see a picture of what's happening in the world.

TRIP team are interested in one thing: validating their own opinions. They don't want to be challenged. Stewart responds to someone smarter than him by complaining that he has "class anger", when the only thing separating them is his accent, upbringing, and education.

They're snakes.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Polanski was interviewed by The Rest Is Politics and came off very badly. If he wants to be taken seriously towards the business end of a parliament then he needs to be able to field some basic probing questions.

Yeah, well I'd take him over a never-was Tory and a war crime enabler any time. I will admit haven't seen it all (I can't bear the idea of watching that chummy Blairite and Tory combo); I've only seen a clip of Polanski not being quite as slick as usual when quizzed on economics. Tricky one, obviously I'd like him to have been a bit surer of his ground but it was more of an ambush than an interview. You don't expect to be tested on facts (that Rory Stuart Googled before the show) in this kind of thing, it's more about your opinions and what you intend to do. There are a whole lot of numbers you could in theory ask of a party leader but they can hardly be expected to be as well prepared on them than a cabinet minister would be about their department.

There's more to it... I never had a dislike of TRIP pair, I even liked Stewart somewhat many years ago.

BUT

The interview with Gary Stevenson, and then the Polanski one were (attempted) hatchet jobs. They want one thing and one thing only: protect the system and protect the way it's always been done.

There's no sentiment for tearing it up, despite the fact that's what the country (the world, even) needs. A force to come in and rip up the political and economic systems that are creating this inequality and making the rich insanely rich and insanely powerful.

You may not like him, but Yanis Varoufakis is nothing if not a well learned economist. Hearing him talk about technofeudalism so strongly is...well, you should listen to him a bit.

Add in the work of Stevenson and Gabriel Zucman, and Richard Murphy on trying to explain economics from outside of the neo-liberal PoV, and you can start to see a picture of what's happening in the world.

TRIP team are interested in one thing: validating their own opinions. They don't want to be challenged. Stewart responds to someone smarter than him by complaining that he has "class anger", when the only thing separating them is his accent, upbringing, and education.

They're snakes.

I have more respect (maybe less disrespect would be more accurate) for Stewart because a) he was a relatively sane Tory in the Brexit days and b) Campbell is a despicable enabler of illegal war who ought to hide his face for the rest of his days. But the way those two can be so chummy reveals how the difference between New Labour and pre-Johnson Tories was more about which school you went to than policy.

Yeah, they're massive supporters of the neoliberal/thatcherite status quo - just as we slip beyond that into pre-fascism. To them left is as unacceptable as far right.

I've got a lot of time for Stevenson, Varoufakis and Murphy (probably Zucman too but I need to read/watch more from him). Agreed about technofeudalism (as Varoufakis calls it) - that is probably what Zuckerberg, Thiel, Bezos, Musk et al are trying to get us to. Most of (written) history (sometimes known as civilisation) had very few people owning almost everything and they'd very much like to get back to that state of affairs.

[Sandydragon]

I’d suggest listening to the interview before dismissing it based on your opinions of the presenters. If you feel that was a hatchet job, what do you think the rest of the media will do to him nearer the election? There’s no point moaning, it’s their job to ask the difficult questions and we moan when media becomes too lightweight. You might instinctively like Polanski but that doesn’t exclude him from media scrutiny and he will need to get a better response than he had in that show if he is going to win people over who aren’t already ideological bedfellows.

[Stom]

I’d suggest listening to the interview before dismissing it based on your opinions of the presenters. If you feel that was a hatchet job, what do you think the rest of the media will do to him nearer the election? There’s no point moaning, it’s their job to ask the difficult questions and we moan when media becomes too lightweight. You might instinctively like Polanski but that doesn’t exclude him from media scrutiny and he will need to get a better response than he had in that show if he is going to win people over who aren’t already ideological bedfellows.

You mean, if you've been briefed that the topic is going to be anti-semitism, bullying, and your experiences...you are asked personal questions that have you thinking emotionally, talking about pains, and then, suddenly, the tack is changed and you're asked very specific number based questions...and you're not a fully trained, experienced leader and public speaker...?

Because...

Do you know who owns TRIP? It's Gary Lineker. He was interviewed by Zack Polanski recently, and he said that the overwhelming response to the episode was positive in Polanski's favour!

So, if the person who has access to all the data, all the responses, and all the info is saying that Polanski is being seen as overall positive out of that awful episode, maybe that says more about your nitpicking and views on him and what he stands for rather than actually listening to what was said.

[Puja]

...and you're not a fully trained, experienced leader and public speaker...?

I think this is a key point. I would agree that TRIP pulled a dirty trick by briefing him that the interview would be about one thing and then pivoting to "Please answer economics questions, citing statistics from memory without mistakes", but he is a party leader now and he will need to be able to do that (or at least do a fuck of a lot better at it than he did) if he wants to be a serious candidate for PM. It wasn't fair, but politics won't be, and hopefully this is a learning experience so that it doesn't happen to him again.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

I’d suggest listening to the interview before dismissing it based on your opinions of the presenters. If you feel that was a hatchet job, what do you think the rest of the media will do to him nearer the election? There’s no point moaning, it’s their job to ask the difficult questions and we moan when media becomes too lightweight. You might instinctively like Polanski but that doesn’t exclude him from media scrutiny and he will need to get a better response than he had in that show if he is going to win people over who aren’t already ideological bedfellows.

You mean, if you've been briefed that the topic is going to be anti-semitism, bullying, and your experiences...you are asked personal questions that have you thinking emotionally, talking about pains, and then, suddenly, the tack is changed and you're asked very specific number based questions...and you're not a fully trained, experienced leader and public speaker...?

Because...

Do you know who owns TRIP? It's Gary Lineker. He was interviewed by Zack Polanski recently, and he said that the overwhelming response to the episode was positive in Polanski's favour!

So, if the person who has access to all the data, all the responses, and all the info is saying that Polanski is being seen as overall positive out of that awful episode, maybe that says more about your nitpicking and views on him and what he stands for rather than actually listening to what was said.

I think the ownership company name of Goalhanger is the giveaway. It’s very clear that Lineker owns a suite of podcasts so thanks for being utterly patronising.

He was asked basic economic questions. As a leader of a party he should be able to handle those. He was asked what the top rate of tax is and how much we are paying on debt interest. Given Polanski is very keen to lecture us on how the economic model needs to change, you would hope that he would understand some basics about the current model.

Your devoted defence of him suggests a blind obsession which I wish you well with.

Polanski is going to face much tougher questioning than TRIP and he needs to learn how to handle himself better rather than rely his followers to make excuses for him.

[Sandydragon]

...and you're not a fully trained, experienced leader and public speaker...?

I think this is a key point. I would agree that TRIP pulled a dirty trick by briefing him that the interview would be about one thing and then pivoting to "Please answer economics questions, citing statistics from memory without mistakes", but he is a party leader now and he will need to be able to do that (or at least do a fuck of a lot better at it than he did) if he wants to be a serious candidate for PM. It wasn't fair, but politics won't be, and hopefully this is a learning experience so that it doesn't happen to him again.

Puja

Thank you. That’s the point I was making originally. Ask Ed Milliband about his bacon sandwich episode. Or Kinnock going arse over on the beach.

I’m not inclined to vote Green but if he is to be taken seriously and attract wider support then he has to be able to handle harder media interviews. He came across as lightweight which isn’t great for any party leader. Being asked what the top rate of income tax is and a hard question., especially for someone who claims the current economic set up isn’t working and you would expect to know the basics about how th current system actually does operate.

Farage is rightly mocked for sound bites with no substance, and it being in command of the detail. Polanski won’t get a free pass.

He has time to improve.

[Son of Mathonwy]

I steeled myself and watched the Gary Stevenson and Zack Polanski TRIP interviews.

Gary Stevenson.
They all seemed to get along well (they wisely didn't try to catch him out on . . . anything really). I'm pretty familiar with his videos so there was little new in his tax wealth not work message for me. His background and experiences in investment banking were more new to me (he was promoting his book after all) and the TRIP guys went into this with enthusiasm. Ultimately they had no good argument against him in or post- interview. Stewart said that he thought there were other problems (unspecified), other than growing inequality, so redistribution wouldn't solve everything but failed to find the flaw in what Stevenson was saying. He also thought that Stevenson was making too much of class. So, not a hatchet job but a disagreement for reasons unarticulated by the TRIP team, like you're not wrong but you're not completely right, so we'll ignore you.

Zack Polanski.
This seemed friendly enough, even the bits where Stewart asked for the figures. To be honest, even though he struggled a little on the point about the amount of interest paid on government debt, he handled it pretty well and I thought came through the interview very positively overall. It was funny how Stewart told him that Gary Stevenson (5 years studying economics at LSE and Oxford) wasn't an economist and yet had not corrected Stevenson himself when he called himself an economist on the show . . . almost like Stewart was trying to catch Polanski out. But afterwards, when Polanski was gone, the hatchet came out: Stewart was horrified at Polanski's lack of knowledge on economic matters and Campbell had a good chortle over Polanski's mentioning of a Greek economist, Varoufakis.

But is this really how any other politician would be treated? I've never seen a politician asked questions like that (essentially tested) about economic facts. How would Starmer or another non-economist politician have fared if given a surprise economic quiz? We don't know because it doesn't happen.

Sure, he will need to get better and probably already has.