Change of name for Labour.

If we're going to have a new name for Labour how about the "We'll Stab You In The Back Whilst Telling You It's For Your Own Good & Lining Our Own Pockets" party? Catchy yes?

And Google “Starmer poppy”. A real eye opener from last November and watch video there , commentary by Farage. KS goes to meet Muslims shuffling his poppy to and fro.
The sight of him wearing a poppy after that episode…

I also think that the past 14 years have made people forget that government isn’t like a glorified game of musical chairs in which PM’s and cabinet ministers change at the drop of a hat. However amusing it might be to some we’ve got this government for five more years.

Starmer didn’t win this election. The Tories lost it (deserved with their ‘One Nation’ and ‘broad church’ nonsense) and he was next in line. For him to keep going on about his “massive mandate” is sickening.

Glad I voted Reform.

If screaming lord sutch was still alive he would have been a better party than this shower of idiots.

Labour had a massive majority

18% of the voting public? I think not Anniebach no matter how it’s spun.

Well we are stuck with Starmer, Rayner, Reeves, Lammy, Miliband and Cooper now until 2029. Think how much damage they can do by then. The last lot were incompetent, but these are actual saboteurs.

I wish they had chosen someone who isn’t so boring. You would think a lawyer might have really good speech capabilities but, no, Starmer’s voice is so dull. Maybe he will get things through parliament because his listeners will be asleep? Charisma by pass there. I still think of this green budgie we used to have, just something about his face. Now if he was honest and trustworthy it wouldn’t really matter I suppose.

He really is boring isn’t he? The nasal speech grates. Hardly surprising given how negative and downbeat he is - he simply doesn’t have the personality of a leader. People don’t want to be led by someone who is so negative about everything. Things were bad in the war but Churchill gave people the hope and encouragement to see through the bad times . All this guy does is create despondency.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Starmer didn’t win this election. The Tories lost it (deserved with their ‘One Nation’ and ‘broad church’ nonsense) and he was next in line. For him to keep going on about his “massive mandate” is sickening.

Glad I voted Reform.

Labour did win the election, more people voted for them than any other party in 411 seats out of 650. Nobody needs to remind anybody of how the British democratic system works, do they?
Would you be in favour of PR, which is the alternative?

FriedGreenTomatoes2

18% of the voting public? I think not Anniebach no matter how it’s spun.

Well we are stuck with Starmer, Rayner, Reeves, Lammy, Miliband and Cooper now until 2029. Think how much damage they can do by then. The last lot were incompetent, but these are actual saboteurs.

Be afraid, be very afraid…

😁

18% of the labour voting public won 411 seats ?

Reform do pop up on TikTok

FullFact.
fullfact.org/election-2024/general-election-result-numbers/

In all the discussion of parties and votes , little is said about the overall turnout. This has been falling. Only 60% of the electorate voted in 2024, a drop of over 7% on 2019.

To quote the source Casdon names above Voter turnout across the UK as a whole was reportedly 60%, declining from 67.3% in 2019. That would be the lowest since 2001 when it dropped to 59.4%, and the second lowest since 1918 when turnout was 57.2%, according to the House of Commons Library.

In the mid 20th century turnout was around 80% and these abstention figures show a growing disillusionment with the political process. If participation rates fall much lower they must make the legitimacy of any goveernment we have suspect, when so few people hve bothered to vote and of those the proportion voting for the winning party are such a small proportion of the total electorate.

nanna8

I wish they had chosen someone who isn’t so boring. You would think a lawyer might have really good speech capabilities but, no, Starmer’s voice is so dull. Maybe he will get things through parliament because his listeners will be asleep? Charisma by pass there. I still think of this green budgie we used to have, just something about his face. Now if he was honest and trustworthy it wouldn’t really matter I suppose.

You really made me laugh . Comparing him to your green budgie - how do I laugh a lot with emojis on here? Something about his face . And I know exactly what you mean ha ha.

I had the same thoughts though - you'd think, as a lawyer he'd have some punchy talk in there. But actually most lawyers do sound pretty boring I think (apologies to any lawyers on here). They sort of get trained that way. But Barristers advocate in court so yes you'd think he'd have some passion.

And yes he is starting to really annoy me too. Can't stand looking or listening to him. I tolerated it during the election campaign - maybe that was hope? But some of the things he's said since - maybe it's psychological finding him annoying now but he's hardly been a bundle of fun has he?

M0nica

In all the discussion of parties and votes , little is said about the overall turnout. This has been falling. Only 60% of the electorate voted in 2024, a drop of over 7% on 2019.

To quote the source Casdon names above Voter turnout across the UK as a whole was reportedly 60%, declining from 67.3% in 2019. That would be the lowest since 2001 when it dropped to 59.4%, and the second lowest since 1918 when turnout was 57.2%, according to the House of Commons Library.

In the mid 20th century turnout was around 80% and these abstention figures show a growing disillusionment with the political process. If participation rates fall much lower they must make the legitimacy of any goveernment we have suspect, when so few people hve bothered to vote and of those the proportion voting for the winning party are such a small proportion of the total electorate.

That is a very good point. I was shocked to find how low the turnout had been.

As for 2001 - I didn't vote that year - first time ever. Primarily because I was out of the country. But I do remember it had been a year of terrible floods and foot and mouth as well I think - pretty chaotic. I also remember thinking Tony Blair was bound to get in again anyway so didn't feel too bad about being out of the country. But the floods and other things I suspect had an effect on voting turn out - and maybe complacency.

gentleshores

As for 2001 - I didn't vote that year - first time ever. Primarily because I was out of the country. But I do remember it had been a year of terrible floods and foot and mouth as well I think - pretty chaotic. I also remember thinking Tony Blair was bound to get in again anyway so didn't feel too bad about being out of the country. But the floods and other things I suspect had an effect on voting turn out - and maybe complacency.

I am not sure I agree with you gentleshores. Apart from snything else the majoirty of the population live in towns, so were completely unaffected by foot and mouth restritions and, if you were a rural dweller, like we were/are, but not involved in agriculture, the F&M epidemic simply ment that farm drives and footpaths were closed off or you drove over disinfectant soaked straw to reach a farm and while floods affect the areas involved - small towns and large areas of farmland life went on as usual. My son lives in York. His street and surrounding streets flooded a few inches, a couple of houses were flooded but he and his girlfriend continued to go to work as normal and do everything else as normal. It only lasted a couple of days.

I would add to my previous information that the lowest turnouts in this year's election were in Labour constituencies, where turnout was often as low as 40%. Highest turnout was in constituencies won by the Lib Dems where turnout was often around 75%

Blair started the rot with his new Labour and this is what we have today. Poor mans' Tories should be their new title.

Many thought Labour are going to win so no need for me to

Labour -the I'm alright , Jack party .

Sarnia

Blair started the rot with his new Labour and this is what we have today. Poor mans' Tories should be their new title.

As I said else where Tony Blair got the Labour party into power and in power for 13 years. Jeremey Corbyn led Labour to a caatstrophic defeat.

A political party, if it to achieve government needs to have policies that appeal to the electorate, the vast majority of whom belong to no party at all.

If you want to stick to your policies regardless of whether they are liked resign yourself to having annual conferences in the local Starbucks, and putting up half a dozen candidates at elections, all of whom lose their deposits.

Taking back water into our own control is popular with the public ,but they don't want to do that.
Not sure raising bus fairs is much of a vote winner either.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

18% of the voting public? I think not Anniebach no matter how it’s spun.

Well we are stuck with Starmer, Rayner, Reeves, Lammy, Miliband and Cooper now until 2029. Think how much damage they can do by then. The last lot were incompetent, but these are actual saboteurs.

Where do you get 18% from? Fullfact say they got 33.7%, compared to 24% for the Tories and 14% for Reform. Even with PR Labour would have won, no matter how it's spun.