Polarisation of society

I think Chatles likes the idea of £8Million spent on photos of him in schools councils public building and having £100 million spent on unnecessary coronation. Only 15% are interested despite all the media hype. Others are not I terested.

It is true Glorianny that the LibDems had to make a difficult choice in 2010- but it was not a choice between left and right.

No matter how much you might have wanted to see a Lib/Lab coalition (and most LibDems would have much preferred that); the numbers did NOT add up.

The choice was therefore between trying to moderate a Conservative led government or taking the risk of another election which the Conservatives would almost certainly have won with a working majority as they were the only party with the money and resources to win .

So the choice was between seeing the country ruined by a right wing government, such as the succession of disastrous right wing governments we have endured since 2015, or putting country before party and trying to work constructively in coalition.

If the 2010 election had been run under a PR system rather than FPTP, and the number of votes was the same, the number of seats for each party would have been different and it would have been possible to form Lib/Labour government.

Oreo

Glorianny

Grany

If you are interested in politics in this country then watch Kier Starmer & The Establishment Coup from Double Down News
m.youtube.com/watch?v=mDaY6K5A2ql

Grany that video seems to have disappeared. The power of Israel?
There is a rather outlandish theory that Starmer is a right wing plant put there to make sure any Labour government stayed firmly to the right. I don't believe it. But some of his views on Israel and Palestine make me wonder about him sometimes.
The apartheid state is completely unacceptable.

Keir Starmer wanted to rightly rid the Labour Party of as much anti-Semitism as he could after taking office.I think he has mainly succeeded.As an intelligent person he realises that the two sides, Israel and Palestine will need a political compromise by both sides.
Jeremy Corbyn was entirely one sided in this case btw. Which resulted in anti-Semitism growing in the far left of the Party.

Why should Palestinians 'compromise' about what has been done to them over so long. IT IS THEIR LAND.

Grany

I think Chatles likes the idea of £8Million spent on photos of him in schools councils public building and having £100 million spent on unnecessary coronation. Only 15% are interested despite all the media hype. Others are not I terested.

You think but don't know.

I think he would rather the money was spent on trees as he is a conservationist.

Only 15% are interested despite all the media hype. Others are not I terested

Have you done a survey of the whole population?

varian

It is true Glorianny that the LibDems had to make a difficult choice in 2010- but it was not a choice between left and right.

No matter how much you might have wanted to see a Lib/Lab coalition (and most LibDems would have much preferred that); the numbers did NOT add up.

The choice was therefore between trying to moderate a Conservative led government or taking the risk of another election which the Conservatives would almost certainly have won with a working majority as they were the only party with the money and resources to win .

So the choice was between seeing the country ruined by a right wing government, such as the succession of disastrous right wing governments we have endured since 2015, or putting country before party and trying to work constructively in coalition.

If the 2010 election had been run under a PR system rather than FPTP, and the number of votes was the same, the number of seats for each party would have been different and it would have been possible to form Lib/Labour government.

Oh come on varian it was all about Nick Clegg having his moment in the spotlight before he went off to pastures new (and more money). It certainly wasn't the honourable thing to do. Perhaps if there had been another election we would have got rid of the Tories earlier.

Even The Guardian seems a bit less keen on Starmer from reading today's editorial.
Rishi Sunak could well win the next election if Starmer carries on as he has been doing.
As for Nick Clegg, he fooled most of us before going into that coalition but he doesn't represent the whole of the Liberal Democrats.

I wish the Labour party would dump Starmer and elect someone with passion and commitment.
If Clegg almost ruined the Lib Dems could Starmer do the same to the LP?

Yes he could.

The anti-Starmer Labour voters make a good case for electoral reform.

If we had PR it would be quite possible for both the Labour Party and the Tory Party to split into two.

The bonkers brexiters of the ERG have as little in common with the centre right as the Starmer supporters do with the far left.

We would almost certainly end up with coalition governments, but they would not be the unhealthy coalitions we have had for so long within the two large parties of people who seem to hate each other more than they hate the opposition.

growstuff

I had one of those green Conservative flyers through the door a few days ago for the forthcoming local election. I was surprised because the candidate is a staunch and vocal Conservative. I thought that maybe he was standing as an independent, so I checked online and he's still standing for the Conservative Party.

Yes very clever eh?

Varol Vorderman is collating these 'green leaflets', any chance you could send me a pic please? (or tell me who the MP is so that I can add it to her list?)

Anyone else suspicious of the volume and ramp up in recent days of Anti Kier Starmer rhetoric that is appearing at the moment in the papers and across all social media.

Smells of a coordinated campaign.

Lots of people saying can't vote Labour, after always voting Labour myself included. I wonder who people will vote for in a general election. I might vote Greens. Starmer saying public and private partnerships in NHS is not what people want to hear. He is not popular. There is an online debate this evening about the erosion of democracy in the Labour Party.

mumof2boys

Anyone else suspicious of the volume and ramp up in recent days of Anti Kier Starmer rhetoric that is appearing at the moment in the papers and across all social media.

Smells of a coordinated campaign.

I agree. This looks to me like a co-ordinated campaign from the dirty tricks brigade, presumably the Tories who know that they are at risk of humiliation in the nest GE. Anyone who thinks this is paranoia obviously hasn't heard to Cambridge Analytica and their involvement in the Brexit vote.

It's Starmer himself people don't like his attack on the left wing and Jews in his party. The young Jess Barnard is hosting a debate about erosion of democracy People can see him for what he is. The rich funding his party and going ahead with private investment in the NHS no clear polices

Grany

It's Starmer himself people don't like his attack on the left wing and Jews in his party. The young Jess Barnard is hosting a debate about erosion of democracy People can see him for what he is. The rich funding his party and going ahead with private investment in the NHS no clear polices

Grany you need to stop exaggerating. You mean ‘some people on the left of the party’ not ‘people’. This thread is not about Starmer, but it’s been hijacked into a rant fest. Why don’t you start a separate thread about that instead?

What do you think about Murdoch’s empire and Obama’s speech about it, that’s far more interesting, and relevant to the thread?

In this case, no. When somebody doesn’t believe your reason for saying something, you explain why you did say it, provide them with the evidence that caused you to say it, and they admit they say it frequently but they still don’t believe your reason for saying what you did, I’m not sure what conclusion you think you should reach. Will let others draw their own conclusions in this very bizarre exchange.

What?!? Sorry but that’s incomprehensible Casdon. The only conclusion I can draw from that is you’re attempting to confuse and deflate with gobbledegook.

Deflect not deflate. Although one could be forgiven for feeling rather let down by that nonsense.

Fleurpepper and anyone else who says/thinks that Palestinian leaders shouldn't have to compromise are right but they will have to, as will Israel in the end for a lasting peace between them.Diplomacy not guns will win the day eventually just as it did in NI.

Grany and * Glorianny* Starmer is the best bet for Labour to win the next GE, can’t you see that?
You may both be far left but the majority in the country aren’t.If you really want Labour to win then get behind him as a leader.

tickingbird

Deflect not deflate. Although one could be forgiven for feeling rather let down by that nonsense.

I’m happy to spell it out if you want tickingbird. You are unable to accept that I was laughing at your entirely predictable jibe at Blair, because I remembered you had done exactly the same thing on a number of occasions before. You confirmed you had frequently said it, but were still unable to accept that was the reason for my comment. On the other hand, I have never previously, or on this occasion, said I condoned Blair’s actions in Iraq and I clarified that in my second post.
My last post wasn’t gobbledegook either, it was an explanation, which didn’t use any technical or meaningless language.

Oreo

Fleurpepper and anyone else who says/thinks that Palestinian leaders shouldn't have to compromise are right but they will have to, as will Israel in the end for a lasting peace between them.Diplomacy not guns will win the day eventually just as it did in NI.

Diplomacy only worked in NI because you had outside influences pushing heavily at both sides of those involved in the conflict to compromise. No one is pushing Israel to compromise and in fact the country is becoming more aggressive and imposing more restrictions on Palestinians. NI was in any case just the tail end of British interference in Ireland. A lot of bloodshed was involved going back centuries. If Israel/Palestine takes the same time to develop a solution you might see peace in 500 years.

Those who think there is some sort of orchestrated media attack on Starmer should look again. There is so much which could be used against him but isn't. His shifting alliances and his honesty for example. His treatment of left wing Jews. The people asking the questions and raising the issues are members or former members of the party. And anyone who really cares about democracy and government should be grateful to them. Because no matter how much you want a Labour government you have to question if an individual who lies, who acts undemocratically, who seems to have no moral compass, is the sort of person this country needs as PM.

Glorianny

Those who think there is some sort of orchestrated media attack on Starmer should look again. There is so much which could be used against him but isn't. His shifting alliances and his honesty for example. His treatment of left wing Jews. The people asking the questions and raising the issues are members or former members of the party. And anyone who really cares about democracy and government should be grateful to them. Because no matter how much you want a Labour government you have to question if an individual who lies, who acts undemocratically, who seems to have no moral compass, is the sort of person this country needs as PM.

Orchestrated media attacks are part of politics though Glorianny, they move from one target to another, build people up and knock them down in the blink of an eye. The attacks from the left of Labour, and the attacks from the right wing media are all with the same aim, to bring him down. If it wasn’t Starmer it would be the next Labour leader (or anybody who isn’t Boris in some media lenses). That’s just how it works. There isn’t one truth about him, or about anybody else, and people have to make up their own minds. Speaking for myself, the more dubious stories I hear the less I believe them, there’s a real danger of crap overload so that if there actually is a really serious concern about his probity it will be missed in all the Peter Crying Wolf stories.

Yes, Casdon, I agree. There is so much media out there that it is remarkably easy to find ways to make people look good or bad, and making anyone seem dishonest is easy too. Shifting things out of context and juxtaposing them with clips made in a different context can easily show people as inconsistent, and that's without allowing for the fact that people often are. We all change our minds and get things wrong, and think again, particularly when being questioned about things we hadn't really considered. So long as the main policies remain solid, and we aren't being lied to deliberately it just stops debate when people squabble over tiny points and try to catch their rivals out.

Also, slightly tangentially, defining the boundaries of acceptability for belonging to a group then suggesting that anyone who thinks outside of that box is a traitor is manipulative (eg 'if you are a good socialist/feminist/Methodist/botanist you will know/think/want/believe the same as I do, and if not, you are wrong/misguided/duplicitous/treacherous, and not really a socialist/feminist/Methodist/botanist at all'). It's rarely done well, and when done clumsily people see straight through it and react against the attempt at manipulation.