Labour will be a major reforming government

Yes, my grandparents disliked his politics intensely, they didn’t “hate” him though. Churchill also made some deathly decisions during the war for which people couldn’t forgive. But it took more than working class people to reject Churchill at the end of the war.

WWM I’ve read it. It ignores Brexit and its disastrous effects on this country’s economy, except to restate Labour’s support for the end of free movement; it ignores the need for massive social housing building, and the removal of right to buy - in fact, it wants the state to subsidise home ownership, a policy which predominantly helps large developers; it doesn’t propose a genuinely redistributive tax system ; it’s limited in terms of devolution, and gives too much to local mayors/authorities and not enough to communities; it says railways will be re-nationalised, yet Starmer said a month ago that they wouldn’t be.

I approve of the environmental direction of travel, but that will be hampered by the ongoing impact of Brexit, by limiting shared scientific knowledge and reducing investment.

It’s tweaks to the existing neo-liberal approach (right down to private sector involvement in health and social care) and thus not transformative, in my opinion.

My natural home is Labour - although I stopped being a member in the Blair years - and if I am still in the UK at the time of the next election, I would vote for them if they were most likely to beat the Tories in my constituency, but I don’t think I’d be voting for a genuinely radical government.

Truss "I wont speak to Nicola Sturgeon "
Starmer "I wont work with the SNP"

The Scottish vote is irrelevent as far as Labour is concerned or they wouldn't be dismissing the party that has won every election for 13 years here .I guess Labour wont be winning the next election either ...they have effectively disenfranchised a huge part of Scotland by their refusal to accept the ELECTED representatives of this country .
Independence IS normal ,having our neighbouring government pillage us ..now ..to give England council tax cuts is not acceptable and I hope more Scots see it for what it is and vote for the ONLY way we will ever get a say in how weare run .Not the piddling amount of "Devolution we have at the moment when WM can over rule us on just about anything .
Glorianny thanks for reiterating what I've been saying on here for years Churchill was hated in most of Scotland ,certainly by my family as the man who left Scottish ivisions of troops behind on the beaches of France ..."they were of no inportance and would be no loss "

I agree - radical it isn’t. But it is a case of not frightening the horses I think. Radical policies are very unlikely to get voted in by the British electorate as the country has moved further and further to the right particularly since 2009 but certainly since 2015, and small steps seem to me to be the way forward as I don’t think the electorate could cope with huge change. Just look at GN, although I appreciate it is the type of demography which naturally resists change.

siope that was my reply to you

Churchill was hated in the South Wales valleys , he was never forgiven for sending troops here with the orders to shoot -
The Tonapandy Riots .

WWM Certainly we have moved to the right. The big question though ‘is did we drift, or were we led?’ and I would argue that we were led, by political parties with clear narratives about why that was the best direction of travel.

For me, Labour could - should - have a clear counter-narrative, evidencing why that would be best for the majority of people in this country (and, environmentally, for the world). It could be that they have one and are too timid to articulate it, but I rather think they just don’t have that kind of vision.

I wonder why, with evidence all around us, that right wing policies have led to disasters in most areas-housing, health, education, transport, water, etc. People aren't starting to look for better ways of doing things.

I think because it would mean a different way of doing things, which would be a change and so many people are afraid of change.

Siope they certainly don't have that sort of vision at the moment.

I accept all grans' adverse criticisms of Churchill that have come from Glorianny, Anniebach and others.

The main point remains, as explained by Whitewavemark, that opinions in 2023 and for many years previously are wrongly informed by media (WWM calls them "newspaper headlines").
How are we to know where to get the honest political information i.e. the truth ?

Primrose53

🤣🤣🤣 votes at 16? At the last elections the 18+ youth couldn’t be bothered to get out of bed and vote even though they had been chanting “ooh Jeremy Corbyn” at Glasto and he had promised them the earth.

16 year olds won’t put down their phones long enough to vote 🤣🤣

And your proof for this is ?

paddyann54, it was the 51st Highland Division, who were sacrificed, to allow others to escape from the beaches at Dunkirk. (You probs know that already). I understand that difficult decisions must be made in war, but to actually use that comment as a rational for choosing those soldiers, unforgivable.
Back to the main thread, promises count for nothing if you don't get elected. Tactical voting seems to have worked in the recent English LE. If Starmer has the sense to negotiate a strategy, then he deserves to be elected. Corbyn and Swinson absolutely blew it with their intransigent postures.

Votes at 16 is really a silly idea. Unless they start politically unbiased lessons at 15. It's a fact that even some 18 year old don't really use their vote and/or don't understand the process. Personally I don't think they should raise it back up to 21. How can people be putting put missing "children" pleas for 16-18 year olds and saying they are not ready for sex or gender realignment then state they are ready to vote at 16. Doesn't make sense to me. I voted as one of the first 18 year old and only voted what my Dad did with no particular understanding at all.

Do think they should raise it back to 21

I wouldn't vote for him until he is able to say what a woman is, so it's a big no from me

People seemed to like Johnson’s so called charisma and charm. I knew some one who met him and said it was a veneer, swiftly switched off when away from the public. Underneath was a calculating dishonest man with a shambolic immoral private life.

Bungle22

People seemed to like Johnson’s so called charisma and charm. I knew some one who met him and said it was a veneer, swiftly switched off when away from the public. Underneath was a calculating dishonest man with a shambolic immoral private life.

I wouldn’t vote for BJ, but the old, “I knew someone who met him” is hearsay.

rainbow13

I wouldn't vote for him until he is able to say what a woman is, so it's a big no from me

Although I fully understand the debate on this issue is complex and many strong feelings, I cannot seriously believe that it can override the dreadful situations we find ourselves in in the NHS, care sector, benefits and cost of living and trading concerns.

By asking Starmer that question continually in the press he is being "set up" by the right to try and find a weak point - anything will do - to maintain the status quo in everything else.
Its a nonsense to ask it (and never give him time for a nuanced answer, btw) when the concerns are being addressed root and branch in the LP to try and find appropriate policy solutions.

Mollygo

Bungle22

People seemed to like Johnson’s so called charisma and charm. I knew some one who met him and said it was a veneer, swiftly switched off when away from the public. Underneath was a calculating dishonest man with a shambolic immoral private life.

I wouldn’t vote for BJ, but the old, “I knew someone who met him” is hearsay.

It seems to be a very common view among people who have known or worked with him, though...

Honest unbiased.
Wikipedia on SENSTIONALISM in the media:

"In journalism and mass media, sensationalism is a type of editorial tactic. Events and topics in news stories are selected and worded to excite the greatest number of readers and viewers. This style of news reporting encourages biased or emotionally loaded impressions of events rather than neutrality, and may cause a manipulation to the truth of a story.[1] Sensationalism may rely on reports about generally insignificant matters and portray them as a major influence on society, or biased presentations of newsworthy topics, in a trivial, or tabloid manner, contrary to general assumptions of professional journalistic standards."

(source: Wilipedia)

Yes wonderful now ask him what a Woman is 🤣🤣🤣 mr turn around on his fence won’t get my vote

Karmer stating what a woman is , more important than the NHS, Food Banks ?

We all have differences priorities

Nusgranny

Primrose53

🤣🤣🤣 votes at 16? At the last elections the 18+ youth couldn’t be bothered to get out of bed and vote even though they had been chanting “ooh Jeremy Corbyn” at Glasto and he had promised them the earth.

16 year olds won’t put down their phones long enough to vote 🤣🤣

And your proof for this is ?

It was all over the news at the time how disappointing the turnout was in the last election for young people!! How did you miss that?

As half of his voters are women yes it’s important.