Fack the royal family

comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 9 minutes ago
I'd have no opinion on the royal family if people didn't talk about them or talk to me about them but whenever I get involved in the subject I realise how much I hate them and the concept of royalty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My man 🥰

McCarthy appears to lose eighth vote for Speaker
Republican Kevin McCarthy appears to be on course to suffer defeat in the eighth vote for Speaker of the House.

Results of the latest ballot are currently being tallied, but more than five Republicans have now opposed his nomination.

That's been enough to derail the process in previous votes.

————

Lol

McCarthy on course for 11th loss
The tally is ongoing, but Kevin McCarthy does not have the votes to win the 11th round.

It's unclear whether a 12th ballot will be held tonight.

————-

This is getting even more beyond stupid now

Human version of Cleveland browns

Bookies should do odds of what # round it will take, be like the grand National

Surprised he doesn't just claim the vote was rigged.

It's what Matt Gaetz and co usually do.

comment by Rosso is just another product of the culture industry (U17054)
posted 19 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 32 seconds ago
Many remainers lent their vote to Labour in 2017 as a means of reversing or minimising brexit, Corbyn failed them on that so, as said, brexit was AN issue but it wasn't the only issue

After 2017 Corbyn did a number of things that turned moderates off him (Salisbury Poisoning for example), the media discourse around him was largely that he was either dangerous or a fool and probably both

And don't forget how much discourse there was around antisemitism.

It's always naive to try and look at historical events and point to one sole cause and this is no different
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The shiiiiit Corbyn got over Salisbury still sticks in the throat.

A perfect example of the media establishment doing everything conceivably possible to undermine the man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody should have swung for the photoshopped hat on the BBC..

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 1 hour, 10 minutes ago
comment by Rosso is just another product of the culture industry (U17054)
posted 19 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 32 seconds ago
Many remainers lent their vote to Labour in 2017 as a means of reversing or minimising brexit, Corbyn failed them on that so, as said, brexit was AN issue but it wasn't the only issue

After 2017 Corbyn did a number of things that turned moderates off him (Salisbury Poisoning for example), the media discourse around him was largely that he was either dangerous or a fool and probably both

And don't forget how much discourse there was around antisemitism.

It's always naive to try and look at historical events and point to one sole cause and this is no different
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The shiiiiit Corbyn got over Salisbury still sticks in the throat.

A perfect example of the media establishment doing everything conceivably possible to undermine the man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody should have swung for the photoshopped hat on the BBC..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It wasn’t photoshopped mate. It was high contrast for dramatic effect (ie both Putin & Corbyn)

Portrayed as a comrade, yes but the hat was a non-story


https://giphy.com/gifs/ORDWIYbrEr7QW8v2Jj?utm_source=iframe&utm_medium=embed&utm_campaign=Embeds&utm_term=https%3A%2F%2Fpetapixel.com%2F

You’ll see the size of the hat doesn’t change at all

Westminster voting intention:

LAB: 46% (+1)
CON: 25% (-3)
LDEM: 9% (+1)
REF: 8% (+1)
GRN: 5% (-)

via @techneUK, 04 - 05 Jan

INJECT IT INTO MY COOOOCK

comment by Ignacio Varga (U11781)
posted 4 minutes ago
Westminster voting intention:

Centrist neoliberals: 46% (+1)
Hard right neoliberals: 25% (-3)
More centrist neoliberals: 9% (+1)
Swivel-eyes: 8% (+1)
Eco social democrats: 5% (-)

via @techneUK, 04 - 05 Jan

INJECT THE POISON DIRECTLY INTO MY HEART
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh fack off

comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 21 minutes ago
Oh fack off
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Starmer, yesterday:

“[Labour won’t be] getting its big government chequebook out.”

“Of course, investment is required - I can see the damage the Tories have done to our public services as plainly as anyone.

"But we won't be able to spend our way out of their mess - it's not as simple as that.

"For national renewal, there is no substitute for a robust private sector, creating wealth in every community."

Rachel Reeves, yesterday:

Asked whether she supported the idea of using spare capacity in the private sector to bring down NHS waiting lists, she told BBC Radio 4's Today programme…

"We've got to do whatever it takes to bring down waiting lists… If there's spare capacity, absolutely we've got to use it."

Wes Streeting, last month (to the Telegraph):

“[The medical unions] are hostile [and they] are holding back the NHS.”

Starmer and Reeves, last month (to business leaders at Canary Wharf):

- Talk of repealing new anti-strike legislation “is jumping the gun a little”
- Both “sympathise with” striking public sector workers but refuse to say that they want them to be paid more
- Labour however *guarantees* it would not levy windfall taxes on the financial services industry

Labour MPs are told that they should not attend picket lines in solidarity with striking workers.

They’re neoliberals. By definition.

Just this *very* clear statement again for a moment:

“…we won't be able to spend our way out of their mess…”

We absolutely *have to* Keir. There are no two ways about it. There’s no other viable option.

1. Austerity does not work. It never does, excepting very specific and extreme circumstances which undoubtedly are not reflected in the UK right now. It’s a poor idea in theory, and has always been worse in practice.

2. Right now, with the threat of stagflation still hanging over the country like the blackest of storm clouds, it’s a particularly bad idea.

The ordoliberal/neoliberal approach to beating recessions is academically and empirically bust. It’s even been thrown on the bonfire by the facking IMF, which has been telling governments they need to be doing more with fiscal stimulus. Yet we’re hearing the same old broken rhetoric even from New New Labour now.

The rhetoric might scare you but the actual policies they announce are far from neoliberal.

I heard the same stuff about Biden who has gone on to be much more progressive than the left feared.

Starmer isn't a career politician, he's the first Labour leader like that since John Smith and will be the first PM in my lifetime to be so. He's not ideologically driven but passionate about this country and pragmatic in his approach to fixing the issues.

The line about not spending our way out of the crises is because of how much damage to the economy and state coffers has been done, we could much easier have borrowed our way out of the financial crises in 2008 when interest rates were low but that's been closed off now.

The Blair govt didn't dramatically increase spending in its first term and I doubt the first Starmer govt will either but it's obvious that the spending will be much more fairly distributed and efficient

Not sure if you were implying this or otherwise, but borrowing hasn’t done any material damage to the economy.

It is also still a very viable (and actually the only) option unless people are happy seeing another period of entrenched deflation/low growth and the accompanying unemployment and further downward pressure on wages that that will bring.

The incredible devaluation we’ve seen in the pound has done next to nothing to help the economy. There’s no reason to believe that further devaluation will do much more than hurt consumers even more.

The two further options are more austerity (which should be struck from the list; see above) or a combination of borrowing and targeted taxation to boost investment and public sector spending.

We should be hearing Starmer and Reeves talking about stoking the economy, not keeping a lid on spending.

If Starmer and Reeves come out talking about spending, they'll open themselves up to the usual 'Labour are fiscally irresponsible' slurs and probably lose voters from the more gullible members of the electorate.

comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 38 seconds ago
If Starmer and Reeves come out talking about spending, they'll open themselves up to the usual 'Labour are fiscally irresponsible' slurs and probably lose voters from the more gullible members of the electorate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then explain why.

Spending - and borrowing to spend, if necessary (which it almost always is) - during a contractionary period isn’t fiscally irresponsible; it’s the exact opposite.

Rosso only the extremely engaged will listen to and digest speeches or go to podcasts etc that talk about the detail like that

For most people their exposure to politics is front pages and soundbites on breakfast TV... You can't do economics 101 with Richard Madeley butting in with questions like "what is a woman"

Irresponsible is deigning to apply the same approach which pummelled the UK economy between 2009 and 2012 and subsequently held it back for the next decade.

comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 4 minutes ago
Rosso only the extremely engaged will listen to and digest speeches or go to podcasts etc that talk about the detail like that

For most people their exposure to politics is front pages and soundbites on breakfast TV... You can't do economics 101 with Richard Madeley butting in with questions like "what is a woman"
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Yeah, I get that; but I still don’t see why they might feel like it’s remotely necessary to use language like that (whether they intend to follow through on reflective policies or otherwise) a) at this point in the election cycle (context fully considered), and b) when the swing voting public has clearly expressed its (overwhelmingly negative) opinions on austerity, is supportive of the ongoing industrial action, wants to see new investment in public services, and is even polling strongly on measures like renationalisation and taxation of wealth.

The Tories slide further towards a minimal state free market libertarianism, the public screams “NOOOOO!”, and Labour follow them rightwards.

Now is literally the perfect time to be making the argument for a new approach.

comment by Rosso is just another product of the culture industry (U17054)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 38 seconds ago
If Starmer and Reeves come out talking about spending, they'll open themselves up to the usual 'Labour are fiscally irresponsible' slurs and probably lose voters from the more gullible members of the electorate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then explain why.

Spending - and borrowing to spend, if necessary (which it almost always is) - during a contractionary period isn’t fiscally irresponsible; it’s the exact opposite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You need to explain that to the percentage of the population who have bought the Tory propaganda the last 13 years, not me.

Labour have to win an election. To do that, they need to make sure they don't fall into the same Tory traps they have done previously.

Without doubt the overton window has been pushed so far to the right that we're approaching failed state territory in terms of services and some really dystopian policies when it comes to care and immigration.

We're traditionally a moderate and centrist (centre right) country, a Labour govt will initially push us back there and then hopefully in a second term with political reform that includes some type of PR to a centre left country

Ridiculous situation but Starmer is clearly focus group lead and doesn't want to spook the normies with scary socialist evils like... Free broadband?

comment by Rosso is just another product of the culture industry (U17054)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 4 minutes ago
Rosso only the extremely engaged will listen to and digest speeches or go to podcasts etc that talk about the detail like that

For most people their exposure to politics is front pages and soundbites on breakfast TV... You can't do economics 101 with Richard Madeley butting in with questions like "what is a woman"
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Yeah, I get that; but I still don’t see why they might feel like it’s remotely necessary to use language like that (whether they intend to follow through on reflective policies or otherwise) a) at this point in the election cycle (context fully considered), and b) when the swing voting public has clearly expressed its (overwhelmingly negative) opinions on austerity, is supportive of the ongoing industrial action, wants to see new investment in public services, and is even polling strongly on measures like renationalisation and taxation of wealth.

The Tories slide further towards a minimal state free market libertarianism, the public screams “NOOOOO!”, and Labour follow them rightwards.

Now is literally the perfect time to be making the argument for a new approach.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Opposition parties win from the centre, they don't generally win by having radical policies. Look at how the current Tories got there - they didn't campaign for their current right wing nonsense in 2010, Cameron was talking about "hugging a hoodie" and environmental issues. Over time, while in government, they have shifted the terms of debate in the direction they wanted and normalised increasingly right wing policies.

Labour also tried making the valid economic arguments in 2010 with "no time for amateurs" and again in 2015 about how bad austerity was as an economic approach and in spite of that the Tories managed to convert a coalition government into a parliamentary majority. Very few people have a decent economic understanding and they rely on the news to tell them if an economic policy is daft/extreme/unscientific. With the modern BBC delivering "editorial balance", e.g. unwilling to explain when a spokesperson is way out of line with consensus as those promoting austerity were with academic economists, there's no point Labour wasting time trying to win a logical, rational debate.

Your policy points are valid Rosso, they will need to spend money to sort out the economic mess we're in, but to get the opportunity to do so they will need to pretend they don't plan to. Modern politics is pretty messed up.

“Opposition parties win from the centre, they don't generally win by having radical policies.”

I get that. But I’m not proposing radical policies. We *know* that austerity doesn’t work, for the public, for the economy or for the party in power. If anything, proposing another round of the same - against all available evidence - is the radical policy! It’s worse than a 50-50 blind gamble, because we’ve seen it fail throughout modern history and all over the developed world.

“Modern politics is pretty messed up.”

Yep; it really is, and FPTP has a lot to answer for.