Keir Starmer, yearly review

ExperiencedNotOld

Hear hear Dickens. That represents exactly what ordinary people want. In fact, I think most are fed up with factional politics as presently represented. I’m doesn’t have to always be this way.

I see why you are saying this but I would really want to know how they intend to meet the generalisations before anyone got my vote.

It loses value if there is nothing, or very little to spend it on. A responsible government wouldn't just 'print' money for no good reason. In our current economic situation we have plenty to spend it on.

Strangely Maizie, I know that. But it is also caused by instability of any kind. We have very recently had an example when this was even suggested and Germany had a rather extreme example in the 1920s. I think you would be hard-pressed to find any economist who thought flooding the economy with newly printed money would not affect it - however much we all went on a buying spree.

DaisyAnne

ExperiencedNotOld

Hear hear Dickens. That represents exactly what ordinary people want. In fact, I think most are fed up with factional politics as presently represented. I’m doesn’t have to always be this way.

I see why you are saying this but I would really want to know how they intend to meet the generalisations before anyone got my vote.

I suppose the ideal is the creation of a new party. But we’ve been there and done that before (SDLP) and that failed.
In the late 70s/early 80s I met a few MPs of blue, red and amber colours. Many had a sense of public service. That appears to have disappeared somewhat. Whilst without proof, I think many view time in politics as a stepping stone to big salaries (a la George Osbourne’s post political rise perhaps).
That’s why I cannot trust them in the main.
My MP, (Con, Devizes) is a waste of space. I have told him that.

Starmer Backs PRIVATISATION And AUSTERITY

m.youtube.com/watch?v=S0gPzIOTsgk

DaisyAnne

Dickens

DaisyAnne

I think the question is - do you want a Labour Party that is in power and appealing to the widest possible audience or a Labour Party that agrees with the view of a, possibly small, proportion of the party members and is out of power? That may be difficult for Labour Party members, such as yourself, but some factions will disagree and agree with you within your party too.

I responded earlier to your post - but either forgot to press "Post Message" or it's just disappeared into the ether. It was a bit 'wordy' so I'll not repeat it.

However, in regard to your above comment, I must point out that I am NOT a member of the Labour Party.

And for further clarification, I don't automatically vote for them either during an election.

I think you have assumed my political bias based perhaps on your own - or maybe what I have written gives the wrong impression (and that could be my fault for not being clear enough). I do espouse some left-wing policies / manifesto pledges, and that's maybe where the confusion has arisen.

Briefly, I don't want a Labour party in the hot seat based simply on the fact that it is the Labour party. I want a party that is above all else wedded to the idea of a more equitable and egalitarian society than the one we have now. A party that encourages sustainable growth, and one that will recognise that public services - health and social care, mental health, etc - are, first and foremost, services rather than business opportunities or commodities, but services that are vital to the nation's health and wellbeing. And the same with education which is just as important.

I'm afraid you can't blame my bias for this Dickens. I thought that you (and others) must be members because you are so sure of your right to tell this membership party what to do. If you are not, then it's a bit like telling the local WI, when you don't belong, how to run their club.

If a Party says they are going in this or that direction I can understand someone saying they will or won't vote for them. I can understand them saying they will vote for them if ... or they will vote for them when ... .

I wouldn't vote for or want a Labour Party under many circumstances and I cannot imagine voting Conservative. If we want to create change, we would have to get in there and help bring it about or you are left making a decision on what they offer. We can't change it.

But that's just how I see it. I'm sure others join you in believing they can change things from a GN forum. I think I have more influence filling in a YouGov Poll.

(You could always form your own party )

I'm afraid you can't blame my bias for this Dickens. I thought that you (and others) must be members because you are so sure of your right to tell this membership party what to do. If you are not, then it's a bit like telling the local WI, when you don't belong, how to run their club.

Oh dear.

I wasn't blaming your bias - I was suggesting what mine might look like from your POV.

... you are so sure of your right to tell this membership party what to do.

???
Can you explain this to me? Are you saying that because I'm not a Labour party member I should refrain from criticism of it and its members - or not challenge its manifesto / policies, or the opinions and assumptions of its members?

As for the Women's Institute - they're not canvassing for votes in an election, so that's complete nonsense to use it as an equivalent example.

But that's just how I see it. I'm sure others join you in believing they can change things from a GN forum. I think I have more influence filling in a YouGov Poll.

This is a forum where people are commenting and debating, giving their opinions, and reasons for those opinions. And that's exactly what I am doing, nothing more. I'm not running a campaign via GN.

I told you what I wanted from a party - any party - from an ideal perspective. That party doesn't exist, it probably never will. I used this fictitious party as a way of explaining what I believe in, and to demonstrate that I'm not a slave to left-wing Labour party politics, and as a method to criticise the current government's failings - as I see them.

Did you not understand this?

Obviously not Dickens, obviously not.

There is no reason for Starmer to adopt a socialist or pro Europe agenda, the voters he is hoping to attract are centrists, that might vote Tory or Lib dem, so a moderate set of policies with modest aims when finances permit.
Those that want leftist policies are going to vote Labour anyway, winning others over matters, because unless he wins with a decent majority he can’t make improvements that are needed.

I wouldn't be too sure about the continuing loyalty of those 'leftist voters'. Starmer isn't exactly working to keep them on side.

MaizieD

I wouldn't be too sure about the continuing loyalty of those 'leftist voters'. Starmer isn't exactly working to keep them on side.

How much do you think that will matter to the election result though MaizieD, as there are a lot more voters in the centre ground than there are ‘leftish? I’m not meaning the appropriateness of that happening, just about the reality of the situation.

Katie I agree that his first job is to attract the centre vote and the ex-Labour Brexit vote, which crosses from left to right. To get in (and for us to have any chance of PR), he has to get the right number of votes in the right places to get the maximum number of seats this time.

My only worry, at this point, is that he won't bring in PR. I doubt he will in the first parliament, but he must do it in the second. I would criticise Blair more for missing the chance of PR than I would for Iraq. We have seen what happens if we don't have it, and I would NEVER forgive the Labour Party if they mucked it up again.

Casdon

MaizieD

I wouldn't be too sure about the continuing loyalty of those 'leftist voters'. Starmer isn't exactly working to keep them on side.

How much do you think that will matter to the election result though MaizieD, as there are a lot more voters in the centre ground than there are ‘leftish? I’m not meaning the appropriateness of that happening, just about the reality of the situation.

I so nearly said that but I have had enough attacks to last a lifetime from the "leftist voters".

I agree. Now is the time for strategy and planning. Not for a mighty swing to the far left as we saw before.

ExperiencedNotOld

DaisyAnne

ExperiencedNotOld

Hear hear Dickens. That represents exactly what ordinary people want. In fact, I think most are fed up with factional politics as presently represented. I’m doesn’t have to always be this way.

I see why you are saying this but I would really want to know how they intend to meet the generalisations before anyone got my vote.

I suppose the ideal is the creation of a new party. But we’ve been there and done that before (SDLP) and that failed.
In the late 70s/early 80s I met a few MPs of blue, red and amber colours. Many had a sense of public service. That appears to have disappeared somewhat. Whilst without proof, I think many view time in politics as a stepping stone to big salaries (a la George Osbourne’s post political rise perhaps).
That’s why I cannot trust them in the main.
My MP, (Con, Devizes) is a waste of space. I have told him that.

The SDLP was only in Northern Ireland, wasn't it ENO?

Starmer is beginning to look totally unprincipled.

He is not interested in democracy but would rather keep FPTP in the hope that next time or the time after or the time after that the Labour Party will be elected by a process of "buggins turn" and it won't bother him if the majority don't vote Labour as long as our sham democracy gives him a win.

Disgraceful.

PR is not going to make much, if any difference to politics in the UK, minority parties will get more influence both from the Left, and Right, UKIP holding the balance of power is not going to please many.
The biggest gainers are initially going to be Lib Dem, who are likely to get 50+ seats if 2019 votes are representative and could easily hold the balance of power. History of them in coalitions does not promise a great success.

As an outsider, Starmer seems mediocre but perhaps he would change if he became the leader. Isn’t there anyone better,though?

Starmer is beginning to look totally unprincipled.

ALL polititians are unprincipled except Corbyn, who did not realise that getting elected is the first object of a politician.

Perhaps I got that wrong! The breakaway from the Liberal party that Wikipedia reminds me was SDP.

varian

Starmer is beginning to look totally unprincipled.

He is not interested in democracy but would rather keep FPTP in the hope that next time or the time after or the time after that the Labour Party will be elected by a process of "buggins turn" and it won't bother him if the majority don't vote Labour as long as our sham democracy gives him a win.

Disgraceful.

FPTP is a Liberal Democrat policy varian. It is not currently a Labour policy. It does matter to Labour policy what Labour voters think of course, but you aren’t going to influence Labour Party policy by badmouthing from the sidelines because everybody knows you are a Lib Dem.. You’d be far better mounting a positive campaign and expending your energy persuading people to vote Lib Dem.

varian

Starmer is beginning to look totally unprincipled.

He is not interested in democracy but would rather keep FPTP in the hope that next time or the time after or the time after that the Labour Party will be elected by a process of "buggins turn" and it won't bother him if the majority don't vote Labour as long as our sham democracy gives him a win.

Disgraceful.

Really? That's not how I see him. But then, I am not a member of another party.

He is slowly bringing out 10-year plans. The timing is important. Maybe some need to remember we are unlikely to have an election for some time. This morning I heard that Wes Streeting has been tasked to bring out a 10-year plan on health. That may be the next one we hear about.

I am sure Starmer is interested in democracy, although from the far right through to the far left, people seem to see democracy a little (or a lot) differently.

Of course, he wants to get the LP in. How can he achieve anything if he doesn't? That's his job. He is not the leader of the Liberal Party. That happily swallowed the Social Democratic Party leaving any sense of "social" or community behind when it suited them. This behaviour is how parties function. He will be able to look at PR once he is safe in his position; that may not be this time around.

You make it sound as if the LDP does not believe in pragmatism, yet they will do whatever they can to take a seat from left or right. I don't think that is the wrong thing to do but the words "kettle, pot and black" come to mind.

There seems to be a bit of "holier than thou" or "holier than Starmer" going on.

How much do you think that will matter to the election result though MaizieD, as there are a lot more voters in the centre ground than there are ‘leftish?

As always, it could make a significant difference in marginal constituencies, Casdon. And that is really what FPTP is all about, isn't it? The marginals.

MaizieD

^How much do you think that will matter to the election result though MaizieD, as there are a lot more voters in the centre ground than there are ‘leftish?^

As always, it could make a significant difference in marginal constituencies, Casdon. And that is really what FPTP is all about, isn't it? The marginals.

I guess it could in marginal constituencies where there is the option to vote Lib Dem instead, I can’t see any of them voting Tory though. Maybe they will just not vote at all, although that will be anathema to many.

Casdon

varian

Starmer is beginning to look totally unprincipled.

He is not interested in democracy but would rather keep FPTP in the hope that next time or the time after or the time after that the Labour Party will be elected by a process of "buggins turn" and it won't bother him if the majority don't vote Labour as long as our sham democracy gives him a win.

Disgraceful.

FPTP is a Liberal Democrat policy varian. It is not currently a Labour policy. It does matter to Labour policy what Labour voters think of course, but you aren’t going to influence Labour Party policy by badmouthing from the sidelines because everybody knows you are a Lib Dem.. You’d be far better mounting a positive campaign and expending your energy persuading people to vote Lib Dem.

FPTP is certainly NOT LibDem policy as you must know. We support democracy - meaning Proportional Representation which would prevent dictatorship by a minority.

At the last Labour Party conference the overwhelming majority of both constituency and unions reps voted to change to PR.

I urge everyone to support the Liberal Democrats and vote LibDem everywhere the LibDem candidate could win but until we have PR, progressive voters need to vote tactically for the candidate in their constituency best placed to defeat the Tory.

You might like to listen to this podcast from the New Statesman.

www.newstatesman.com/podcasts/new-statesman-podcast/2023/01/labour-change-voting-system

varian

Casdon

varian

Starmer is beginning to look totally unprincipled.

He is not interested in democracy but would rather keep FPTP in the hope that next time or the time after or the time after that the Labour Party will be elected by a process of "buggins turn" and it won't bother him if the majority don't vote Labour as long as our sham democracy gives him a win.

Disgraceful.

FPTP is a Liberal Democrat policy varian. It is not currently a Labour policy. It does matter to Labour policy what Labour voters think of course, but you aren’t going to influence Labour Party policy by badmouthing from the sidelines because everybody knows you are a Lib Dem.. You’d be far better mounting a positive campaign and expending your energy persuading people to vote Lib Dem.

FPTP is certainly NOT LibDem policy as you must know. We support democracy - meaning Proportional Representation which would prevent dictatorship by a minority.

At the last Labour Party conference the overwhelming majority of both constituency and unions reps voted to change to PR.

I urge everyone to support the Liberal Democrats and vote LibDem everywhere the LibDem candidate could win but until we have PR, progressive voters need to vote tactically for the candidate in their constituency best placed to defeat the Tory.

You might like to listen to this podcast from the New Statesman.

www.newstatesman.com/podcasts/new-statesman-podcast/2023/01/labour-change-voting-system

Sorry, getting my abbreviations mixed up, you’re right, I meant PR. Members of the Labour Party did vote in favour of PR at the last Labour conference, but not all voted for motions get into policy, as you are aware - lots of motions are supported, only some are adopted to manage the agenda and priorities, that’s how it works. It’s not to say it won’t be adopted in the future, but it’s not going to make any difference if members of other parties agree or not was the point I was trying to make,

Of course the correct way to vote is to put a line through every candidate’s name and write
None of the above
Then you have voted? As opposed to choosing not to as a third of the electorate did in 2019?

“I urge everyone to support the Liberal Democrats and vote LibDem everywhere the LibDem candidate could win but until we have PR, progressive voters need to vote tactically for the candidate in their constituency best placed to defeat the Tory.“
I believe this to be a vain hope in many constituencies. I live in a true blue sure bet - but look at other parties policies that would have an adverse effect on the maintenance of country life and you have your answer why. It’s all very well trotting out vote winning policies written from a metropolitan viewpoint - try living the life affected.