Galloway

1finny said:
Starmer pssisses me off no end - but that is simply untrue
None of them, ever, would put VAT on private schools

And, as has been said - there is no manifesto yet
Click to expand...
Ok. I may have over-egged it by using the word "everything" and I should have said the vast majority.

On that though. He knows that the vast majority of the country are against private schools. Only 7% of kids are privately educated and charging VAT instead of doing something about getting rid of them altogether doesn't actually change anything about the imbalance between the rich that can attend them and the rest that can't. Even the majority of the centre-right Tory voters he is seeking to attract aren't wealthy enough to make use of private education. Proper Tories probably see it as a benefit because the people that can barely afford to go there shouldn't be mixing with them anyway.

A sensible Tory would realise that a policy like that could be a vote winner but they wouldn't do something that would go against their base if they don't have to. Labour regularly do things that go against their base to try and win votes.
 
Nano said:
TCouldhe major Starmer critics that I have seen on here are all people like me that should be smack bang in the middle of what Labour stand for. It is Labour moving right and chasing the Tory vote which means they no longer represent the people that they should be representing and that is why I am critical. I don't agree with political parties "moving". They should have an ideology and work towards that. If they want more votes they should convince people that what they are offering is the best option. It's utterly pointless winning if you are just going to do the same as the opposition anyway.

I haven't changed my ideology. People like me just want Labour to be in a position where my beliefs and theirs align. You are semi-correct in that I am not a Labour voter. I am a person at a specific point on the political spectrum and I will vote for whichever party best represents my beliefs. Under Corbyn that was Labour 100%, under Starmer it isn't. If it was a 50/50 decision between Labour or Tories then Labour would be closer to me and get my vote every time because they are always going to be closer to me than the Tories. It isn't that way though and me voting for Labour in the current system can be taken as an endorsement of them and I can't currently endorse them and that is because they are not doing what is needed to be done to represent the majority of people in the country that need the most help.
Click to expand...
What sort of policies and manifesto pledges would you want from Labour ?
 
Nano said:
The major Starmer critics that I have seen on here are all people like me that should be smack bang in the middle of what Labour stand for. It is Labour moving right and chasing the Tory vote which means they no longer represent the people that they should be representing and that is why I am critical. I don't agree with political parties "moving". They should have an ideology and work towards that. If they want more votes they should convince people that what they are offering is the best option. It's utterly pointless winning if you are just going to do the same as the opposition anyway.

I haven't changed my ideology. People like me just want Labour to be in a position where my beliefs and theirs align. You are semi-correct in that I am not a Labour voter. I am a person at a specific point on the political spectrum and I will vote for whichever party best represents my beliefs. Under Corbyn that was Labour 100%, under Starmer it isn't. If it was a 50/50 decision between Labour or Tories then Labour would be closer to me and get my vote every time because they are always going to be closer to me than the Tories. It isn't that way though and me voting for Labour in the current system can be taken as an endorsement of them and I can't currently endorse them and that is because they are not doing what is needed to be done to represent the majority of people in the country that need the most help.
Click to expand...
And that is fair comment but some who post on here are so anti Starmer but quiet about the right wing disaster zone that is Sunak and co that they must, in my opinion, have closet agendas, I sometimes think they are the same person posting under a few names, the themes are so aligned.

I disagree with you about ‘moving’, I think political parties do have to move with the times and a changing world.

I vote Labour because I can’t stand the Tories on a number of fronts but my main one, and a lot of people I know in real life disagree with me on this, is that I think they are an extreme party of the right wing who masquerade as a party of the people knowing the strings they need to pull to get the vote of poor people who know no better than to follow their masters. A party rooted in the feudal system.

On that basis I only have one real and serious option and that is Labour under Kinnock, or Blair, or Brown, or Milliband, or Corbyn, or now Starmer…otherwise we just get more right wing mess to benefit the very rich.
 
Has anyone seen the letter drops from George in Rochdale?

Depending on who you were, he either sent a ‘I’ll stamp out grooming gangs’ or a ‘pro Palestine’ letter.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5709.png
    IMG_5709.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 21
This is a decent result for me. I know he's a one off but the rejection of the two official far right parties is important. Labour are going to have to field a good candidate to take this seat at the next election, and they're going to have produce policies to back him/her up.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
This is a decent result for me. I know he's a one off but the rejection of the two official far right parties is important. Labour are going to have to field a good candidate to take this seat at the next election, and they're going to have produce policies to back him/her up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a shame they've elected an absolute crank, but even when there was no proper Labour candidate, and most of the candidates were divisive nutters, the Tories got absolutely nowhere near.

Outside of the independent, the Tory candidate was one of the least controversial too.
 
HolgateCorner said:
And that is fair comment but some who post on here are so anti Starmer but quiet about the right wing disaster zone that is Sunak and co that they must, in my opinion, have closet agendas, I sometimes think they are the same person posting under a few names, the themes are so aligned.
Click to expand...
I see that as the same way we don't discuss the tactics, team selections or transfers in depth for teams that aren't Boro. Labour are, or should be in my opinion, my team so I am going to spend the vast majority of my time talking about them and what I think they could/should do differently. I don't talk about the opposition often because it's a given that they are no going to get my vote and whatever they do I think is wrong.

HolgateCorner said:
I disagree with you about ‘moving’, I think political parties do have to move with the times and a changing world.

I vote Labour because I can’t stand the Tories on a number of fronts but my main one, and a lot of people I know in real life disagree with me on this, is that I think they are an extreme party of the right wing who masquerade as a party of the people knowing the strings they need to pull to get the vote of poor people who know no better than to follow their masters. A party rooted in the feudal system.

On that basis I only have one real and serious option and that is Labour under Kinnock, or Blair, or Brown, or Milliband, or Corbyn, or now Starmer…otherwise we just get more right wing mess to benefit the very rich.
Click to expand...
One positive thing I would say for the Tories is that they know what they are and they do whatever they can to satisfy their base. They might say one thing or another to attract other voters but they do very little that benefits those people unless it also benefits their base. I.e. the Tories don't move at all, they just sell their message well/deceptively enough to attract more voters. Basically their whole spiel is that the Tories are for the wealthy or the status quo and they won't take anything away from you. Their primary method for winning votes is convincing enough people that they are the wealthy ones and they have something to lose so will benefit by having a Tory government

Labour should be the same and that is my biggest criticism that they are not. Labour should stick to Labour policies that benefit the majority and be better at making people realise that if you earn £40k, £60k or £100k+ you still aren't the people that will benefit from Tory policy. Their actual base is the people that donate to them. It is far more beneficial for the majority of people that use the NHS, state school system, infrastructure, police services, care services etc. to vote for Labour than it is the Tories whatever their income level. I.e. bring people to you instead of changing what you believe and going to them because that means abandoning the people you are supposed to be there to help in the first place.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
This is a decent result for me. I know he's a one off but the rejection of the two official far right parties is important. Labour are going to have to field a good candidate to take this seat at the next election, and they're going to have produce policies to back him/her up.
Click to expand...
The Rochdale CLP overlooked a perfectly good candidate in Paul Waugh. It didn't do its due diligence on Azhar Ali. For once the Labour Party Central Office can't be criticised for parachuting in its own candidate.
 
HolgateCorner said:
That’s just a load of guff from Sky, the right wing media are desperate for Starmer to back the Palestinians so that they can label him anti Semitic and no different to Corbyn, Labour hasn’t changed …..so you may as well vote Tory after all…..

I’ve said before on here the right wing in this country care nothing for Palestinians or Jews they just care about manipulating the political situation for themselves to keep in power. It’s as simple as that.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more
 
But you have middle class people writing two pages of things about the Labour Party they want blah blah left wing policies blah blah. Then cant explain. Suburban Che Guevara's.
 
mercury_redstone7 said:
But you have middle class people writing two pages of things about the Labour Party they want blah blah left wing policies blah blah. Then cant explain. Suburban Che Guevara's.
Click to expand...
There's fair comment from working class people about what the policies should contain. I probably have a different definition of class structure to yourself, having said that.
 
Well I've never seen any "fair comment" for a long time on here I wish I had. Its like the old "I used to vote Labour" the louse bound shills roll out.
 
BoroMart said:
the policies will be agreed and communicated prior to an election in a manifesto. This is always the way, they're not in power (yet) so they don't need to give solutions and strategy yet in any major detail.
Click to expand...
I know:)
But I keep hearing, he isn't left wing enough, I want some left wing policies... Like ! .........then silence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top