| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
 |
|
| White House MSM correspondent: The majority of Americans blame President Trump for the war and the dire economic state they increasingly find themselves in. |
A little perspective may be needed here. The only thing that has changed in the American economic landscape is the increased price of petrol and while that is important it does not, one may feel, amount to 'a dire economic state' as that phrase would be ordinarily interpreted.
As for 'increasingly', it hasn't budged since going up from three dollars and change before the war to four dollars and change after it began.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | * One of the things voters either don't care about or are hostile to is public ownership.
* One of the things Labour MP's care about is public ownership.
I have listened carefully to Labour MPs' answers to the question, "A change of leadership is all very well, but what changes in policy are you in favour of to win back the voters?" So far I've only heard three things mentioned (it's generalities otherwise):
steel nationalisation
water nationalisation
more social housing |
For last century Labour has had General Election results in the 35%-45% range. Frustratingly, for the comrades' this meant, they most often finished second, to the Conservatives (the natural party of government). So Labour sought to broaden its appeal, to move to the centre.
Labour is now at around 20% of the vote. Anything around 35% -40% will, with the current situation, ie: the Conservatives in disarray, make them competative, in fact Labour might very well win again with under 40%, after all it was victorious with just 33.7% last time out....
Labour simply needs to get back their tribal vote, that Starmer is currently losing them. Nationalisation policies might not command the support of a majority of voters, but they are just what is neeeded, for Labour to win.
.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: |
As for 'increasingly', it hasn't budged since going up from three dollars and change before the war to four dollars and change after it began. |
Its on average four dollars and a half, but the point is, gas gives folks a verifiable realiable inflation level, that they personally experience (they have lost faith in economists, MSM and politicians, constantly spinning the various index inflation numbers) and from what they directly experience it has gone up since Trump instigated his war.
Cause = Trump instigated War
Effect= Rising inflation.
Effect on Trump= Worse poll ratings than Nixon during Watergate.
Its simple and obvious.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
* One of the things voters either don't care about or are hostile to is public ownership.
* One of the things Labour MP's care about is public ownership.
For last century Labour has had General Election results in the 35%-45% range. Frustratingly, for the comrades' this meant, they most often finished second, to the Conservatives (the natural party of government). So Labour sought to broaden its appeal, to move to the centre. |
And with great success electorally 1997-2010 and 2024-9.
| Labour is now at around 20% of the vote. Anything around 35% -40% will, with the current situation, ie: the Conservatives in disarray, make them competative, in fact Labour might very well win again with under 40%, after all it was victorious with just 33.7% last time out.... |
OK
| Labour simply needs to get back their tribal vote, that Starmer is currently losing them. |
OK
| Nationalisation policies might not command the support of a majority of voters, but they are just what is neeeded, for Labour to win. |
This is a non-sequitur. Are you arguing that Labour's tribal vote favours nationalisation, or nationalisation will cohere Labour MP's sufficiently that they will win back the tribal vote?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
As for 'increasingly', it hasn't budged since going up from three dollars and change before the war to four dollars and change after it began.
Its on average four dollars and a half |
Like I said.
| but the point is, it gives folks them a verifiable realiable inflation level |
Inflation has scarcely budged.
| that they experience (they have lost faith in economists, MSM and politicians, constantly spinning the various index inflation numbers) |
It is true various foodstuffs and energy sources have gone up in recent years for various reasons but only the recent petrol pump rise is down to Trump.
| and from what they directly experience its gone up since Trump instigated his war. |
It has provided the MSM with a shorthand for the decline in Trump's support since he was elected. Which predated the Iran War.
Cause = Trump instigated War
Effect= Rising inflation.
Effect on Trump= Worse poll ratings than Nixon during Watergate.
Its a simple and obvious. |
It is more a case of the MSM saying x, meaning people say x, the MSM echoes back x. Even though x is erroneous, it becomes 'a truth'. That doesn't mean you or I should believe it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
2010 was important as this marked the end of the rebrand, New Labour.
Conservative Party: 306 seats (36.1% of the vote)
Labour Party: 258 seats (29.0% of the vote)
Liberal Democrats: 57 seats (23.0% of the vote)
Starmer, who it appears to Wiley is New Labour redivivus (look at the cabinet, and the additional appoinntments of Mandelson, Powell now Brown Harman etc..) won fortuitously with 33.7%, and is now at 19%.
Starmer has been reinstating a failed brand.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Streeting is the 'New Labour' candidate and circumstances have made him a shoe-in because the Old Labour candidates are stymied:
* Andy Burnham because he isn't an MP and can't become one in time
* Angela Raynham because she is a tax criminal and can't serve her time in time.
But Streeting is the Mandelson/Starmer candidate. No sooner has he kissed hands (with the brother of 'that man') than he will be outed in the Epstein papers or Mandelson's court testimony or the Starmer memoirs or just generally as, to put it in Wiley terms, the latest representative of 'a failed brand'.
| Because this is what it's really all about. |
Ever since the demise of Thatcher, nobody's been paying heed to what 'the British' want. Or at any rate what a wrecking minority of them want. Which is some sort of Farage-lite.
You and I may not want it, the red wall/blue wall voters may find they don't want it once they've tasted it but, until we have our full Trump revolution, we will continue to cycle through parties and governments that nobody wants.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Things are so fast-paced on the Iranian front I have to check in every morning with Al-Jazeera and CNN. Things are so fast-paced on the British front I have to check in every morning with BBC and Sky News.
Should I be pleased with these exciting but exhausting calls on my time or should I be alarmed by it all?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
Surely Streeting suffers from the Brown-May-Starmer syndrome? They were all professional politicians and hence truly weird people. Before they got into power they were hidden from too much public view whilst their party machines sold them as "a safe pair of hands."
As soon as they got into power they revealed themselves as truly odd fish. The more the public saw of them, the less they liked it.
Only chance Labour have is with Angela Rayner.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
An excellent prognosis except does Starmer fit the mould? He had an independent career--as Director of Public Prosecutions. Also, didn't we try breaking the mould with Boris Johnson, a journalist?
Angela Rayner might do wonders for the Labour Party but could the country wear her? In any case, she seems to have taken herself out of the running because of the tax thing. (Which means there is something that doesn't bear scrutiny we don't know about.) Unless she's being tactical.
Looking back at British prime ministers since Walpole, not many of them broke the mould.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
There are 403 Labour MPs, so the odds are there could be a good PM in amongst this lot somewhere.
The main problem is that majority are wet left, who are fuzzy idealists, they actuallty are representive of the majority of the Britsish public and MSM, (including Wiley) but they dont have a programme, other than helping out those who are less fortunate, without alienating the bond markets.
So you have lots of folks with admirable qualities and motivations, just not what is needed for a PM.
What is needed is someone who is not wet left.
Sorry Angela. Too nice.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Wiley wrote: | | There are 403 Labour MPs, so the odds are there could be a good PM in amongst this lot somewhere. |
In the old days you had to have occupied at least one of the great ministries of the state to earn your ticket. Now, Minister of Health qualifies if Wes is anything to go by.
| The main problem is that majority are wet left, who are fuzzy idealists, they actuallty are representive of the majority of the Britsish public and MSM, (including Wiley) |
And Mick to some extent.
| but they dont have a programme, other than helping out those who are less fortunate, without alienating the bond markets. |
In a nutshell.
| So you have lots of folks with admirable qualities and motivations, just not what is needed for a PM. What is needed is someone who is not wet left. |
This new Home Secretary looks promising.
I disagree that either this or her tax affairs are her chief drawbacks. She is not working class in the right way, nor is she middle-class-but-concerned in the right way.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
The world awaits my prediction
1. Makerfield by-election called
2. NEC grants Andy Burnham permission to run
3. Burnham wins by-election handily
4. Requisite number of Labour MP's trigger leadership election
5. Starmer resigns
6. Burnham becomes leader and prime minister unopposed
7. Labour government continues unchanged except for Starmer
8. Labour wins 2029 general election
9. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news
10 You've only got yourselves to blame.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
July 24.........
| Anchor of channel 4 News wrote: | | The challenge for political broadcasting is enormous, and rather satisfying to watch. After years of personality-driven and chaotic, shallow politics coverage across much of the media, which was largely about instability, gossip and leadership crises we now have a govt with massive majority, widespread internal agreement and no likelihood of massive instability anytime soon. A great environment for a programme like #c4news full of policy nerds and people who prefer to argue about what ideas work than who should be the front person. |
Spare a thought for all those poor policy wonks and nerds, that only like discussing policy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Somebody pointed out that if the new broom proposes different policies--which they are all agreed is why Starmer had to go--then he (or she) won't have a mandate, and will have to seek a fresh one from the voters. They are all agreed that won't be necessary.
'They're fed up with having to vote all the time." As Andy Burnham didn't say.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
