You must log in or # to comment.
Odd, as I had been told Labour were the same as the Tories, yet this seems quite different! Much to consider.
I keep hearing that “all politicians are as bad as each other” so this does not compute.
I might keep doing this every time Labour do anything (unless they do something really Tory, of course).
Is your username in relation to the DnB producer? Or are you them? Or unrelated?
Unrelated. Given the fact that I am a big fan of Star Wars, people often assume it’s that but it’s actually a reference to Flash Gordon. The nickname predates the Web and so, when it came to pick a username for things I went with that.
It was the combination with the picture that gave me the vibe, since I think he released a few things on the shogun label I thought maybe! Cool username either way.
It’s handy because it also covers Star Wars and Warhammer 40k.
They are the same if you have the political instincts of a woodlouse.
"They are all the same, is the battle cry of the politically apathetic, and always has been there’s nothing new about it now.
Right but this is an easy win for Starmer. Something very unpopular you can scrap, that is costly, that even if you’re a bigot you can recognise isn’t working, etc. That’s something you can instantly do to create the impression you’re very different to the previous party. And the impression, per your comment, is impactful. It really doesn’t say much one way or the other about more important policies (e.g. like the Tory cuts that he said pre-election he would not axe).
And yet, even with all you say about the policy being true, the Tories still committed to it over multiple PMs and Home Secretaries, while Labour opposed it at every step and scrapped it at the first opportunity. This does constitute a difference between the two. And even if it’s (just) that Labour can tell when something’s unpopular, expensive, cruel and doesn’t work, that’s a positive difference.
They are not simply scrapping and unpopular policy, they’re scrapping a policy they criticized from the start, long before it was evident to anyone else whether it would work or not. At the very least does this not demonstrate greater political acumen on Labour’s part?
A Labour insider confirmed to The Telegraph that it was now “dead”, saying: “If Rishi Sunak thought Rwanda would work, he wouldn’t have called an election. It was a con. By calling an election, Sunak was acknowledging that fact.”
Angry side of the pond here. Did the good guys win?
In addition to what Skua said, it’s also worth pointing out that Reform, the main far-right party, led by the repulsive Nigel Farage (Brexiteer, friend of Trump, and so on), also made major gains, and came second in many constituencies. So although Labour has a majority now, things could get very ugly next time around if they don’t do a good job.
So although Labour has a majority now, things could get very ugly next time around if they don’t do a good job.
And that’s the worry - people were highly-motivated to get the Tories out, so there was a lot of tactical voting, plus Reform split the right wing vote. Next time around, Labour are the incumbents and they’ll have to convince the electorate to explicitly vote for them (and if Reform and the Tories merge, that could be a major problem). However, Starmer is a smart guy who has demonstrated that he is prepared to think tactically and play the long game. So I bet that, as well as the first 100 days, he’ll have the start of a plan that aims to get them to the point that they can demonstrate improvements in everyone’s lives by the next election. I suspect a Green New Deal may be key to that.
if Reform and the Tories merge
is this in anyway likely? a pitiful slapfight seems more probable from an exterior perspective but "¯_(ツ)_/¯ "
Reform is the 4th-largest party in Parliament. If the UK had a law requiring mouthpieces of foreign powers to register, that would affect Reform, which repeats Russian talking points verbatim. Better, such mouthpieces should be banned from office.
That should apply to those who repeat verbatim the positions of the Israeli governing party as well.
No they’re not:
-
1st Labour 412
-
2nd Conservative 121
-
3rd Liberal Democrats 72
-
4th SNP 9
-
5th Sinn Fein 7
-
6th= Left-wing pro-Gaza Labour defectors (not a party as such but they are pretty well aligned) 5
-
6th= DUP 5
-
6th= Reform 5
-
9th= Greens 4
-
9th= Plaid Cymru 4
-
11th SDLP 2
-
12th= Alliance 1
-
12th= UUP 1
-
6th largest, with only five seats out of the Commons’ total 650 compared to the SNP’s nine and Sinn Féin’s seven. I suppose you could argue that they are 5th largest since SF don’t take their seats. They did get the third-highest vote share though, just got absolutely fucked by FPTP. And hey, if anyone had to get fucked by FPTP, I’m glad it was them. But the number of votes they got is pretty alarming.
Very similar vote counts as ukip ten years ago in many places
Of the two big parties, yes, without a doubt. There’s plenty to criticise Starmer’s Labour for but they’re a hell of a lot better than what we had before this election. Starmer is certainly not an inspiring candidate and has given a lot of ground to the Conservatives on policy positions, but we can probably at least look forward to a lot less random lashing out at whichever vulnerable group looks like a useful target this week
The much less bad guys won. They still have some unacceptable policies, for example on trans rights and Palestine.
It’s wild that you guys have more left parties in the US and without an electoral college they actually have a shot of winning and yet you guys keep chosing the conservatives and the “centrist liberals” just like the US does anyway.
It’s only Day 1, but it is kinda looking that way.
That has got to have been one of the dumbest policies in history
It was a stunt, not a policy.
Curious to see how Starmer tackles the channel crossing problem. This policy was a gimmic but there were some signs that it was affecting migrant flows with more people appearing in the Republic of Ireland to claim aslyum. Additionally the scheme that Australia ran - which was much more brutal than the Rwanda scheme - did ultimately reduce small boats crossings to practically 0 within a few years. I think they might still even have people detained in Papa New Guniea like 15 years after their scheme ended.
Faster processing might help reduce the backlog but when people are coached as to what they need to say to be granted asylum claims it is borderline impossible to stem the ‘pull’ factor from that avenue alone. Often migrants arrive without their documentation so returning them to their country of origin becomes difficult since the countries want proof that the person is actually a citizen.
Pretty much the only way you can curb the issue without a 3rd country scheme is to get the French authorities to stop the boats before they set off. This is logistically challenging given the length of the coastline. Arresting the traffickers will only do so much when there is a lot of potential profit to be made.
idk willing to give Starmer a chance and trust him on this one. It’s a high profile and visible issue that a lot of the electorate care about. He needs to get on top of it to keep Reform from capitalising on it.
