Is the country ready for a Farage government?

Oreo

What did they used to say? Because it wasn’t always ‘working people’ this that and the other.
Maybe they just said people, or voters or citizens?

Probably 'working class', which is now seen as outdated and (by some) offensive? IMO it's not inclusive enough as people with what might be called 'middle class' jobs are also 'working people'.

Or 'taxpayers', which includes the ones profiting from the work of 'working people'?😀

They are always going to upset someone, I suppose.

What did they used to say? Because it wasn’t always ‘working people’ this that and the other.
Maybe they just said people, or voters or citizens?

That’s exactly the point though. Are they supposed to use soundbites for those who don’t have time to listen to whole speeches or not?

‘Working people’ is shorthand for ‘taxpayer’ or ‘contributor’ - those who are supporting everyone else. The people who get up every morning and go to work whilst others choose not to, to make profits for employers (who often use taxpayers’ money to top up low wages) so they can pay rent to those with more than one house, and bills to make profits for shareholders. Retired working people are included in that, as I see it.

If politicians had to say all of that every time there would be no space for policies as interviews are kept short as nobody has time to listen to the full half hour.

Oreo

Am sick to death of hearing about working people tbh, even tho I am working! It’s being done to death in speeches.

I would think the majority of us were 'working people' a few (or more) years ago! Somestill are, despite being past the age of retirement. No-one seemed to think we were a special case then, or perhaps we were just too busy to notice.

No am not a Labour member Maybee70 but up to now a life long Labour voter. I have contacted my MP about several things this last year, not that any good came of it mind you but am a strong believer in letting them know.Their own MP’s snipe from the sidelines let alone the voters!
The only point in my ‘coming up with constructive criticism’ would be if Starmer appointed me to his office.😄
It’s been a disappointing year for Labour voters and my only hope is that there are four more to go.

escaped

^Have you heard or read the speech? If you had you would understand what he means^.

How many people are commenting and scoffing about something they didn't read or hear?

In reality, hundreds of thousands will be doing just that, because unlike retired people, they don't have the luxury of listening to a couple of hours' speeches on a particular day.
(DD1 was busy running a school department, DS was somewhere in Saudi working on a project, DD2 was probably at the gym as well as attending to her 3 young children. Their partners likewise).

Of course they hear snippets and soundbites, as I do abroad, but my belief is that a more memorable positive slogan, arising from the murky mire that inevitably got highlighted, would have been more beneficial to the PM.

Another thing I was quite astounded about when first coming onto this forum.

Posters were expected to provide links on this and that, "evidence", have read things in depth etc etc.

Time has moved on.
Some retirees, well quite a lot, are still working.
Retirement age keeps going up.

People just dont have the time [or even want] to do all that.

How many under 60s sit down and listen to a news programme.
Personally, I dont know any.

Burnham has made a complete idiot of himself. I don’t think he will be challenging Keir again. Oreo, as you say you are a Labour voter how about coming up with some constructive criticism and ( although I assume you do this already) contact your local Labour Party to air your grievances or your MP if they are Labour. There is no hope for the party if their own members continually snipe from the sidelines .

I'm not denying that many people can't listen to live speeches, or that reading/listening to headlines on the News is the reality for probably most people.

That's not the point I was making though, and I was not being patronising, thanks very much. I was saying that, in response to being asked if she had heard the speech, escaped gave the answer that no, she hadn't, but that's ok as it is the optics that matter, not the speech. That is not the same as saying that many people couldn't listen live, is it?

Sorry to labour the point (no pun intended) but when the optics become what matters, the game is lost. The people controlling the media are the likes of Musk and Murdoch, who will never give a fair crack of the whip to anything other than an agenda that suits them. SM were supposed to democratise information, but it is clear that there are bots and other provocateurs online pushing that agenda too. Many believe that Putin is behind it, but of course it can't be proved, any more than any spy-type activity can be proven.

People have to see beyond the 'optics' or there really is no point in politicians saying anything. So far, the government has been poor at getting messages across, partly because they have just been poor at it, and partly because of what I describe above, and now they have tried to turn that around they are still ridiculed with 🤣 emojis instead of engagement with what was said,(great debate there), and we are told that the content is secondary to the optics. Talk about an uphill climb.

Am sick to death of hearing about working people tbh, even tho I am working! It’s being done to death in speeches.

Casdon

I’m so enjoying seeing the Starmer haters rattled by his speech, that’s the best indicator of success there is. Thanks ronib and eazybee for brightening my morning.

You can’t be serious, thinking that two posters on a forum didn’t like Starmer’s speech and in your view are ‘rattled’, why on earth would that make anyone’s day.There is no indicator of success for Labour at all as yet and they have to dig deep in the next four years to find it.Starmer may for now have seen off a circling Andy Burnham but that’s no comfort for the voters about the way things are going in the country.
Immigration that’s out of control and food prices and utilities escalating in price are the key things most people want dealing with.

Rachel Reeves's rousing speech was for and aimed at 'working people's although I confess to not hearing the first part of it.

As escaped points out, many working people would be at work, not having the time to sit down to listen to lengthy speeches at Party conferences. They therefore have to rely on a precis, snippets and soundbites reported by media outlets. If, of course, they have much time to listen at all.

People don't have to listen to anyone - just see what the media have to say on the subject? Is that really considered democracy now? I despair.

I too despair. Yet more patronising remarks from party supporters who cant accept that not everyone shares their views. Not the way to make friends and influence people.

The general public have more chance now than ever before to listen to conferences, speeches, interviews through recordings, catch-up or access them later if wished; many do so.
Otherwise they may read the reports in a wide range of print or on line at their leisure.
Then form their own opinions.

but my belief is that a more memorable positive slogan, arising from the murky mire that inevitably got highlighted, would have been more beneficial to the PM.

I agree with you, escaped.

Of course the media are going to focus on the anti-Reform discourse and anyone with any critical faculty is going to wonder why Labour didn't do it much earlier.

(I'm actually as sick of Labour doing all this flag waving patriotism nonsense as I am of Reform adherents doing it)

Have you heard or read the speech? If you had you would understand what he means.

How many people are commenting and scoffing about something they didn't read or hear?

In reality, hundreds of thousands will be doing just that, because unlike retired people, they don't have the luxury of listening to a couple of hours' speeches on a particular day.
(DD1 was busy running a school department, DS was somewhere in Saudi working on a project, DD2 was probably at the gym as well as attending to her 3 young children. Their partners likewise).

Of course they hear snippets and soundbites, as I do abroad, but my belief is that a more memorable positive slogan, arising from the murky mire that inevitably got highlighted, would have been more beneficial to the PM.

escaped

PaynesGrey

but I wouldn't use most of the valuable 60 (?) minutes of my speech in public to slag off someone else so brusquely.

He didn't. Did you watch or listen to it?

Of course not, I'm abroad and enjoying my time in the Autumn sun, though the temps have cooled.

You didn't get my meaning ..... that listening to the speech or not, the unwelcome tirade was exactly what was picked up and concentrated on by most of the media. Even the French paper I read this morning said KS was unnecessarily combatative because he is struggling plus que jamais. It's in the optics.

And who controls the optics? And does anyone honestly think that doesn't matter? People don't have to listen to anyone - just see what the media have to say on the subject? Is that really considered democracy now? I despair.

Will we see Mr Farage's tax returns soon?

“I suspect ramping up the personal safety angle is all part of his planned get out strategy, why i think he will eventually run away so that he never has to take on the role of Prime MInister if it ever gets that far. His unsuitablity for office would be found out in days. If he runs away he can claim he was the best Prime Minister the UK never had but had to put his own safety first.”
Someone I spoke to who worked with him at LBC said he doesn’t want to be PM. He just enjoys the fight and the power he seems to have over people. How people can take seriously a party that apart from one charismatic ( to some) eloquent member consists of Lee Anderson with hangers on such as Ann Widdecombe and Nadine Dorries is beyond me.

He’s the leader of a minority party with five seats in a 650 seat Parliament. In the great scheme of things, he’s insignificant.

But clearly not to you, Paynes Grey, or to Starmer and his confederates. All the attention is focused on Farage and Reform and his perceived threat to Labour, instead of Labour's plans for improvement, (after 14 months they must have some) after arriving in government with none.

Fourteen months of blaming the Conservatives for everything, now seamlessly transferred to Farage. Starmer failing? Perish the thought.

It’s far too late for any renewal and stop pretending otherwise. It’s a fight for survival.

Yes, that does seem at odds but I don’t see anything wrong with tightening the rules on IDLR. Ten years is the benchmark for other things e.g. years of NIC needed for State Pension unless 80 or older.

Mahmood has made it clear that this is a consultation; some may qualify sooner based on their contributions to society and changes would not apply to migrants already in the UK or at least before 2021.

We shall see.

ronib

An enemy of national renewal … who is writing this stuff? How renewed does Starmer want the UK to be?

Have you heard or read the speech? If you had you would understand what he means.

How many people are commenting and scoffing about something they didn't read or hear?

MaizieD there’s a massive difference between tightening the rules on ILR and scrapping it altogether!

An enemy of national renewal … who is writing this stuff? How renewed does Starmer want the UK to be?

LizzieDrip

Great speech by the Prime Minister yesterday. Showed passion; spoke from the heart.

At last, doing what some people applaud Farage for … saying it like it is!

Then our Home Secretary spoke about how she was going to tighten the rules on Indefinite Leave to Remain, and for obtaining citizenship, in a way that seems to indicate that she hasn’t yet got the message that Labour is no longer ‘Reform-Lite’.
Oh dear..

Great speech by the Prime Minister yesterday. Showed passion; spoke from the heart.

At last, doing what some people applaud Farage for … saying it like it is!