Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Tory leadership is wrong on Scottish tactical voting – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,164
edited April 2023 in General
imageThe Tory leadership is wrong on Scottish tactical voting – politicalbetting.com

The leader of the Scottish Conservatives Douglas Ross has been wrapped on the knuckles by the party’s London bosses for suggesting that voters north of the border should tactically vote Labour in certain seats in order to keep the SNP out.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Test
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    Yes, they're wrong, but I contest that they don't understand the situation in Scotland. The issue is they feel like they cannot state it officially as they need to make English voters really really scared of a Labour government in order to have a chance, and knowingly nodding at such a strategy north of the border might undermine that.

    As OGH suggests the voters in Scotland may well do it regardless, to the net benefit (they hope) of Scon, Slab and even Sld.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,851
    edited April 2023
    kle4 said:

    Yes, they're wrong, but I contest that they don't understand the situation in Scotland. The issue is they feel like they cannot state it officially as they need to make English voters really really scared of a Labour government in order to have a chance, and knowingly nodding at such a strategy north of the border might undermine that.

    As OGH suggests the voters in Scotland may well do it regardless, to the net benefit (they hope) of Scon, Slab and even Sld.

    Missing the point, though, isn't it? As a good Unionist Mr Ross should knuckle down to what his organ-grinder tells him to do.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,595

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Yes, they're wrong, but I contest that they don't understand the situation in Scotland. The issue is they feel like they cannot state it officially as they need to make English voters really really scared of a Labour government in order to have a chance, and knowingly nodding at such a strategy north of the border might undermine that.

    As OGH suggests the voters in Scotland may well do it regardless, to the net benefit (they hope) of Scon, Slab and even Sld.

    Missing the point, though, isn't it? As a good Unionist Mr Ross should knuckle down to what his organ-grinder tells him to do.
    Mr. Smithson is very powerful but it's surely a conspiracy too far to suggest he pulls Douglas Ross's strings.
    And he keeps misspelling "first" as "test"
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,657
    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,368

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Where it may filter through to the public is if the small-l liberals with media jobs treat Starmer and Labour differently as a result. Even though the media is dominated by right-wingers, there are still some small-l liberals about, and they will be concentrated in the media consumed by Labour voters.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,652

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    The people with trans flags in their bios and rants about five-figure salaries (!) in their recent posts were always against Starmer.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,657
    @OwenJones84
    How can anyone watch this and not conclude Keir Starmer isn't as dishonest as he is devoid of principle?

    To argue otherwise, you have to become a liar yourself, which is why - as the expression goes - 'a fish rots from the head down'.


    https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1645152275311075328
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,843
    ping said:

    Following @AlastairMeeks ’s lead, I’ve deleted my Twitter. Not that I ever posted, but it’s now become more annoying than useful.

    Monetisation, dressed up as “personalisation” destroys everything.

    Google, Facebook, WhatsApp and now Twitter.

    It’s an assault on objective reality.

    If PB starts down that route, I’ll be gone from here, too.

    Please don’t, @rcs1000 @MikeSmithson

    Deleted my Twitter way back in November, as soon as Musk took over.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    edited April 2023
    The problem the Tory leadership has with Ross's now withdrawn suggestion seems pretty obvious to me. It is that, if Conservative supporters were to follow his suggestion in Scotland, it would improve the electoral arithmetic for a viable Labour majority or Lab-Lib coalition government following the UK general election.

    If the vast majority of Scottish seats are once again won by the SNP, there's still a realistic possibility that, faced with a refusal by Starmer to give ground on constitutional issues, the SNP will make things difficult by combining with a Conservative opposition in parliament to defeat a Lab-Lib coalition at will, making it difficult to sustain a Labour-led government for any period and making likely an early general election later in 2025 or 2026, at which the Conservatives would get a second bite at the cherry.

    So it seems to me that the Conservatives' prospects are better served by the SNP holding on to seats in the face of a Labour challenge, rather than Labour winning those seats with or without Conservative tactical votes.


  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103

    The problem the Tory leadership has with Ross's now withdrawn suggestion is pretty obvious to me. It is that, if Conservative supporters were to follow his suggestion in Scotland, it would improve the electoral arithmetic for a viable Labour majority or Lab-Lib coalition government following the UK general election.

    If the vast majority of Scottish seats are once again won by the SNP, there's still a realistic possibility that, faced with a refusal by Starmer to give ground on constitutional issues, the SNP will make things difficult by combining with a Conservative opposition in parliament to defeat a Lab-Lib coalition at will, making it difficult to sustain a Labour-led government for any period and making likely an early general election later in 2025 or 2026, at which the Conservatives would get a second bite at the cherry.

    So it seems to me that the Conservatives' prospects are better served by the SNP holding on to seats in the face of a Labour challenge, rather than Labour winning those seats with or without Conservative tactical votes.


    Union prospects first.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,652

    The problem the Tory leadership has with Ross's now withdrawn suggestion seems pretty obvious to me. It is that, if Conservative supporters were to follow his suggestion in Scotland, it would improve the electoral arithmetic for a viable Labour majority or Lab-Lib coalition government following the UK general election.

    If the vast majority of Scottish seats are once again won by the SNP, there's still a realistic possibility that, faced with a refusal by Starmer to give ground on constitutional issues, the SNP will make things difficult by combining with a Conservative opposition in parliament to defeat a Lab-Lib coalition at will, making it difficult to sustain a Labour-led government for any period and making likely an early general election later in 2025 or 2026, at which the Conservatives would get a second bite at the cherry.

    So it seems to me that the Conservatives' prospects are better served by the SNP holding on to seats in the face of a Labour challenge, rather than Labour winning those seats with or without Conservative tactical votes.


    Even more simply, an SNP role in the governing majority gives the Tories an attack line, in a way the Lib Dems can't quite match up to.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,904

    @OwenJones84
    How can anyone watch this and not conclude Keir Starmer isn't as dishonest as he is devoid of principle?

    To argue otherwise, you have to become a liar yourself, which is why - as the expression goes - 'a fish rots from the head down'.


    https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1645152275311075328

    How can anyone read the comments of Owen Jones and not conclude that he and his fellow travellers on the far left want Starmer to fail at the next general election?
    But is he wrong?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    Well done Jon Rahm, and on Seves birthday too. A proper champion.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,843

    @OwenJones84
    How can anyone watch this and not conclude Keir Starmer isn't as dishonest as he is devoid of principle?

    To argue otherwise, you have to become a liar yourself, which is why - as the expression goes - 'a fish rots from the head down'.


    https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1645152275311075328

    How can anyone read the comments of Owen Jones and not conclude that he and his fellow travellers on the far left want Starmer to fail at the next general election?
    Tory sleeper agents.
  • @OwenJones84
    How can anyone watch this and not conclude Keir Starmer isn't as dishonest as he is devoid of principle?

    To argue otherwise, you have to become a liar yourself, which is why - as the expression goes - 'a fish rots from the head down'.


    https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1645152275311075328

    How can anyone read the comments of Owen Jones and not conclude that he and his fellow travellers on the far left want Starmer to fail at the next general election?
    Well, they do. They think it will bring about the return of St. Jez, or the installation of another moron, who will give them all well paid jobs doing absolutely nowt.

    It makes no odds to idiots like this whether there is a Labour government or not, their cosseted lives will remain largely the same.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    edited April 2023

    @OwenJones84
    How can anyone watch this and not conclude Keir Starmer isn't as dishonest as he is devoid of principle?

    To argue otherwise, you have to become a liar yourself, which is why - as the expression goes - 'a fish rots from the head down'.


    https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1645152275311075328
    How can anyone read the comments of Owen Jones and not conclude that he and his fellow travellers on the far left want Starmer to fail at the next general election?
    Well, they do. They think it will bring about the return of St. Jez, or the installation of another moron, who will give them all well paid jobs doing absolutely nowt.

    It makes no odds to idiots like this whether there is a Labour government or not, their cosseted lives will remain largely the same.

    Owen Jones is simply a left wing Dan Hodges. He sold out years ago to following whatever maintains him in “clicks”.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,904

    Well done Jon Rahm, and on Seves birthday too. A proper champion.

    9/1 at kick-off. I wasn't on.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    @OwenJones84
    How can anyone watch this and not conclude Keir Starmer isn't as dishonest as he is devoid of principle?

    To argue otherwise, you have to become a liar yourself, which is why - as the expression goes - 'a fish rots from the head down'.


    https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1645152275311075328

    How can anyone read the comments of Owen Jones and not conclude that he and his fellow travellers on the far left want Starmer to fail at the next general election?
    But is he wrong?
    I mean the video was pretty compelling.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,865

    The problem the Tory leadership has with Ross's now withdrawn suggestion seems pretty obvious to me. It is that, if Conservative supporters were to follow his suggestion in Scotland, it would improve the electoral arithmetic for a viable Labour majority or Lab-Lib coalition government following the UK general election.

    If the vast majority of Scottish seats are once again won by the SNP, there's still a realistic possibility that, faced with a refusal by Starmer to give ground on constitutional issues, the SNP will make things difficult by combining with a Conservative opposition in parliament to defeat a Lab-Lib coalition at will, making it difficult to sustain a Labour-led government for any period and making likely an early general election later in 2025 or 2026, at which the Conservatives would get a second bite at the cherry.

    So it seems to me that the Conservatives' prospects are better served by the SNP holding on to seats in the face of a Labour challenge, rather than Labour winning those seats with or without Conservative tactical votes.


    Yes - that in terms of big picture strategy, it suits the SNP to have Tory governments in Westminster that few Scots have supported, is key. And was underappreciated during all the shenanigans that led up to the 2019 GE - not least by the LibDems first and Labour next, who allowed the SNP to pick the election date at the best possible moment for the Tories.

    The SNP champions the anti-Tory cause north of the border whilst praying that their enemy will get elected south of it. Tory HQ knows this, and to an extent the relationship is symbiotic since having the SNP dominant in Scotland makes their trump card of frightening the English with the risk of nationalist leverage potent in the first place. If we got back to Labour dominance in Scotland with the SNP marginalised (and the Nats are certainly giving it their best shot….) then the Tory hand would be missing its Ace.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    What Macron says about Taiwan -- the core security theme in the Indo-Pacific -- vindicates the Australian decision to cancel the submarine deal with France and to create AUKUS with the UK and the US.

    https://twitter.com/ulrichspeck/status/1645094073219391488
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    edited April 2023
    ping said:



    If PB starts down that route, I’ll be gone from here, too.

    Please don’t, @rcs1000 @MikeSmithson

    If they wanted to make bank they could an 'Ignore Poster' feature as a 5 quid/month option. A premium tier at a tenner a month that lets you ignore "The Alky from The Spectator" is probably commercially supportable.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,977
    Dura_Ace said:

    ping said:



    If PB starts down that route, I’ll be gone from here, too.

    Please don’t, @rcs1000 @MikeSmithson

    If they wanted to make bank they could an 'Ignore Poster' feature as a 5 quid/month option. A premium tier at a tenner a month that lets you ignore "The Alky from The Spectator" is probably commercially supportable.
    Back in the mists of time and during a previous technical manifestation of the site there was such a thing named Ye Olde Edmund’s Widget, provided generously foc.
    An unintended consequence was PB Tories endlessly going on about the irritating posters they were specifically blocking using the widget, which was an odd kind of ignoring.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723
    Dura_Ace said:

    ping said:



    If PB starts down that route, I’ll be gone from here, too.

    Please don’t, @rcs1000 @MikeSmithson

    If they wanted to make bank they could an 'Ignore Poster' feature as a 5 quid/month option. A premium tier at a tenner a month that lets you ignore "The Alky from The Spectator" is probably commercially supportable.
    Quite a few would pay to ignore the filth you post.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Xi Jinping -- a chapeau to you 🎩. You flattered Macron, fed his ego, it was just too easy.
    Macron responded by helping to throw a wedge into #transatlanticrelations, into the EU, & possibly NATO. Not bad for 6 hours of Xi's valuable time. Macron's #CarnivalofVanity continues.


    https://twitter.com/theresaafallon/status/1645146499771146240
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586

    Xi Jinping -- a chapeau to you 🎩. You flattered Macron, fed his ego, it was just too easy.
    Macron responded by helping to throw a wedge into #transatlanticrelations, into the EU, & possibly NATO. Not bad for 6 hours of Xi's valuable time. Macron's #CarnivalofVanity continues.


    https://twitter.com/theresaafallon/status/1645146499771146240

    Sucking up to China, anything to distract from the riots back at home.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,865
    The models are showing a strong jet stream forming over the southern UK for later this week; looks like some chunky weather is coming our way…
  • Dura_Ace said:

    ping said:



    If PB starts down that route, I’ll be gone from here, too.

    Please don’t, @rcs1000 @MikeSmithson

    If they wanted to make bank they could an 'Ignore Poster' feature as a 5 quid/month option. A premium tier at a tenner a month that lets you ignore "The Alky from The Spectator" is probably commercially supportable.
    Sorry, I was harsh. He's having a tough week
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,613
    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    The second poster highlights the issue well. People on here say: "We don't want to remove rights from trans people!"; yet anyone agreeing with the second poster is calling exactly for rights to be removed from trans people.

    Trans people have always existed. Trans people will have been using the toilets of their new gender for as long as there have been gendered toilets.

    It is also patently unpoliceable, and the effects of it on women who do not exhibit 'womanly' traits - or who do not fir the bigoted views of bigots on what a woman should look like - might be severe.
  • Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    Good morning

    It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming

    Labour have opened a can of worms
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,403

    Dura_Ace said:

    ping said:



    If PB starts down that route, I’ll be gone from here, too.

    Please don’t, @rcs1000 @MikeSmithson

    If they wanted to make bank they could an 'Ignore Poster' feature as a 5 quid/month option. A premium tier at a tenner a month that lets you ignore "The Alky from The Spectator" is probably commercially supportable.
    Sorry, I was harsh. He's having a tough week
    Why? Is he a Yorkshire supporter?
  • ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    ping said:



    If PB starts down that route, I’ll be gone from here, too.

    Please don’t, @rcs1000 @MikeSmithson

    If they wanted to make bank they could an 'Ignore Poster' feature as a 5 quid/month option. A premium tier at a tenner a month that lets you ignore "The Alky from The Spectator" is probably commercially supportable.
    Sorry, I was harsh. He's having a tough week
    Why? Is he a Yorkshire supporter?
    I was crying tears for them yesterday.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,300
    edited April 2023
    Mike Smithson - 'Ross is right here and the Sunak leadership is wrong and have shown that they simply don’t understand Scottish politics.

    For ever since the huge rise of the SNP following the 2014 IndyRef there has been a strong pattern of Labour, Lib Dem and Tory voters getting behind the candidate in their constituency most likely to stop the SNP.

    My guess is that this practice, which arguably has helped the Tories win more Scottish seats overall, will continue whatever the London bosses might say.'

    Mike, you hit the nail on the head! And more importantly Douglas Ross is going to do what he did back in the 2021 Holyrood electiion campaign, he is going to ignore the same journalists/commentators criticism of his campaign which then saw him retain the gains that Ruth Davidson achieved back in the 2016 Holyood election despite a Boris Johnson premiership in Downing Street that cost the SConservatives half their MPs in the 2019 GE.

    Its a win win for Douglas Ross if the Westminster Conservatives criticise him for this, he defines and declares his independence from Westminster like a London Mayor candidate would. And already wise SLabour commentators are pointing out that he is deliberately trying to undermine the SLabour party who would not risk being seen to be in cahoots with the SConservatives in a joint tactical voting campaign because they are desperately trying to woo back the left leaning SLabour voters that went to the SNP. But that is all window dressing for Douglas Ross if the real message reaches those SLabour/SLibdem voters in the Highlands, North East, West Coast and the Borders and other SConservative/SNP marginal seats they gained and then lost between the 2017/2019 GEs.

    A gentle reminder from the previous thread, back in the 1992 GE where the Conservatives bucked the polling trend and the Exit poll, their only Conservative gain on the night was the Scottish seat Aberdeen South...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    For those who don’t sneeringly dismiss Unheard out of hand:

    https://unherd.com/2023/04/how-thatcherism-outgrew-its-mistress/
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    Good morning

    It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming

    Labour have opened a can of worms
    Yeah, that is the thing. There were reports about labour bosses being 'happy' with how the ads had gone down, conclusions apparently based on anecdotal evidence and the fact that it had generated a lot of publicity, although the publicity it did generate was largely self generated, by reference to unease within the party about the ads.

    I think that the experience of the past, is that the tories will prove themselves to be more ruthless and effective at this business, labour may come to regret this change in direction.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    The second poster highlights the issue well. People on here say: "We don't want to remove rights from trans people!"; yet anyone agreeing with the second poster is calling exactly for rights to be removed from trans people.

    Trans people have always existed. Trans people will have been using the toilets of their new gender for as long as there have been gendered toilets.

    It is also patently unpoliceable, and the effects of it on women who do not exhibit 'womanly' traits - or who do not fir the bigoted views of bigots on what a woman should look like - might be severe.
    The rights of biological women should be paramount. Nothing bigoted in that.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,080
    edited April 2023
    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    Good morning

    It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming

    Labour have opened a can of worms
    Yeah, that is the thing. There were reports about labour bosses being 'happy' with how the ads had gone down, conclusions apparently based on anecdotal evidence and the fact that it had generated a lot of publicity, although the publicity it did generate was largely self generated, by reference to unease within the party about the ads.

    I think that the experience of the past, is that the tories will prove themselves to be more ruthless and effective at this business, labour may come to regret this change in direction.
    It is a real misstep by Starmer and labour

    As a former labour stragist put it you have to be certain your poster is believable and credible and this is not and the message just gets lost

    He went on to say he would not have published it

    Starmer and labour have put themselves alongside Braverman with these ill conceived posters
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,403
    edited April 2023

    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    Good morning

    It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming

    Labour have opened a can of worms
    Yeah, that is the thing. There were reports about labour bosses being 'happy' with how the ads had gone down, conclusions apparently based on anecdotal evidence and the fact that it had generated a lot of publicity, although the publicity it did generate was largely self generated, by reference to unease within the party about the ads.

    I think that the experience of the past, is that the tories will prove themselves to be more ruthless and effective at this business, labour may come to regret this change in direction.
    It is a real misstep by Starmer and labour

    As a former labour stragist put it you have to be certain your poster is believable and credible and this is not and the message just gets lost

    He went on to say he would not have published it

    Starmer and labour have put themselves alongside Braverman with these ill conceived posters
    It reminded me of that terrible ‘we can’t go on like this’ poster from Cameron, which sparked a thousand internet memes as well.

    But bad as that was, and stupid as it was, at least that wasn’t trying to smear his opponent directly.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723
    Indeed he should be know as Smear Starmer
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,300
    edited April 2023
    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    Good morning

    It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming

    Labour have opened a can of worms
    Yeah, that is the thing. There were reports about labour bosses being 'happy' with how the ads had gone down, conclusions apparently based on anecdotal evidence and the fact that it had generated a lot of publicity, although the publicity it did generate was largely self generated, by reference to unease within the party about the ads.

    I think that the experience of the past, is that the tories will prove themselves to be more ruthless and effective at this business, labour may come to regret this change in direction.
    I still remember the Labour Life on Mars/Ashes to Ashes campaign ads where they tried to negatively dipict David Cameron as Gene Hunt sitting on an Audi Quattro with the captions 'don't let him take Britain back to the 1980's' and 'Fire up the quattro its time for change'. I really hope that David Cameron's campaign team sent the Labour spads behind that idea a crate of beer with the message no hard feelings but thanks...
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,232
    felix said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    The second poster highlights the issue well. People on here say: "We don't want to remove rights from trans people!"; yet anyone agreeing with the second poster is calling exactly for rights to be removed from trans people.

    Trans people have always existed. Trans people will have been using the toilets of their new gender for as long as there have been gendered toilets.

    It is also patently unpoliceable, and the effects of it on women who do not exhibit 'womanly' traits - or who do not fir the bigoted views of bigots on what a woman should look like - might be severe.
    The rights of biological women should be paramount. Nothing bigoted in that.
    That isn’t what @JosiasJessop is calling bigoted.

    And whilst your comment might not be bigoted, it is the politics of fantasyland. I struggle to form a view on the endless (important) debates about the rights of women vs the rights of trans people. It’s a complex issue.

    But the one crystal clear conclusion for me is that rights are never paramount. They are always the starting point for a messy compromise at an institutional or societal level. To deny this and to use the language of rights being paramount is immature politics.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,613
    felix said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    The second poster highlights the issue well. People on here say: "We don't want to remove rights from trans people!"; yet anyone agreeing with the second poster is calling exactly for rights to be removed from trans people.

    Trans people have always existed. Trans people will have been using the toilets of their new gender for as long as there have been gendered toilets.

    It is also patently unpoliceable, and the effects of it on women who do not exhibit 'womanly' traits - or who do not fir the bigoted views of bigots on what a woman should look like - might be severe.
    The rights of biological women should be paramount. Nothing bigoted in that.
    Really? I'd argue it's a classic case of bigotry.

    There's a great deal to be said about your comment, but let's take just one point: who polices it? If a woman thinks that another person in the toilet is male, what does she do? Does she call the police? Does she confront the person directly? And what happens when (as happens) they get it wrong? Should women who do not fit the stereotypical views of womanhood - say, butch women - be treated to abuse when they go to the toilet? Or are they not 'women' in your eyes?

    And I'd argue that the rights of *no* group should be 'paramount'. Rights are often a balance between competing groups, as rights for one group often impinge (in minor or major ways) on other groups. And we certainly should not have the case where there is a tyranny of the majority: where the 'rights' of a larger group are seen as more critical than those of a minor group, simply because there are more of them. You may note that's been tried in the past; rarely to good consequence.
  • Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    felix said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    The second poster highlights the issue well. People on here say: "We don't want to remove rights from trans people!"; yet anyone agreeing with the second poster is calling exactly for rights to be removed from trans people.

    Trans people have always existed. Trans people will have been using the toilets of their new gender for as long as there have been gendered toilets.

    It is also patently unpoliceable, and the effects of it on women who do not exhibit 'womanly' traits - or who do not fir the bigoted views of bigots on what a woman should look like - might be severe.
    The rights of biological women should be paramount. Nothing bigoted in that.
    The rights of both women and men who think they are women need to be balanced.

    The recent letter from the EHRC sets out the advantages of clarifying “sex” = “biological sex” but also points out that this carries potential disadvantages for people who identify as other than their biological sex.

    The mess the census has made by using “inclusive” language that has evidently confused non-native English speakers illustrates the dangers of believing that “inclusion” should only cover gender identity. Either that or Newham is indeed the “trans capital” of the U.K. and one in 67 Muslims are trans…

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-does-the-census-say-there-are-more-trans-people-in-newham-than-brighton/

    How many “cervix havers” are going to die because they didn’t realise that meant, them, “women” so should come forward for a smear test?

    Stonewall’s influence has been destructive and harmful.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Oh dear, what are they thinking? Nothing positive to say at all.

    Hope they like choosing the mud fight with the pigs, because the pigs are definitely going to enjoy it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,403

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    If that’s not a belated April Fool, that’s stupidity. If Campbell’s behind this, he’s losing his touch.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,662

    Indeed he should be know as Smear Starmer

    My role that
  • Sandpit said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Oh dear, what are they thinking? Nothing positive to say at all.

    Hope they like choosing the mud fight with the pigs, because the pigs are definitely going to enjoy it.
    The reaction of some PBers is actually quite funny, I decided to visit the PB thread the day Boris Johnson smeared Sir Keir Starmer over Jimmy Savile.

    For maximum lolz I may share the comments from that day of the PBers who cheered that smear but seem outraged by these ads.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    felix said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    The second poster highlights the issue well. People on here say: "We don't want to remove rights from trans people!"; yet anyone agreeing with the second poster is calling exactly for rights to be removed from trans people.

    Trans people have always existed. Trans people will have been using the toilets of their new gender for as long as there have been gendered toilets.

    It is also patently unpoliceable, and the effects of it on women who do not exhibit 'womanly' traits - or who do not fir the bigoted views of bigots on what a woman should look like - might be severe.
    The rights of biological women should be paramount. Nothing bigoted in that.
    Really? I'd argue it's a classic case of bigotry.

    There's a great deal to be said about your comment, but let's take just one point: who polices it? If a woman thinks that another person in the toilet is male, what does she do? Does she call the police? Does she confront the person directly? And what happens when (as happens) they get it wrong? Should women who do not fit the stereotypical views of womanhood - say, butch women - be treated to abuse when they go to the toilet? Or are they not 'women' in your eyes?

    And I'd argue that the rights of *no* group should be 'paramount'. Rights are often a balance between competing groups, as rights for one group often impinge (in minor or major ways) on other groups. And we certainly should not have the case where there is a tyranny of the majority: where the 'rights' of a larger group are seen as more critical than those of a minor group, simply because there are more of them. You may note that's been tried in the past; rarely to good consequence.
    Then I'm bigoted and proud. What kind of balance is there when the 0.001% are trumping the 99.9%? I'm a proud gay man and I support tolerance for all . I don't support tyranny of the minority. Name calling people for using their common sense is water off this s duck's back. back.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,670
    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.
  • Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Labour haven't thought this through

    There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Sandpit said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Oh dear, what are they thinking? Nothing positive to say at all.

    Hope they like choosing the mud fight with the pigs, because the pigs are definitely going to enjoy it.
    The reaction of some PBers is actually quite funny, I decided to visit the PB thread the day Boris Johnson smeared Sir Keir Starmer over Jimmy Savile.

    For maximum lolz I may share the comments from that day of the PBers who cheered that smear but seem outraged by these ads.
    Better still share it with the mountain of Labour supporters who are expressing the bulk of the outrage. Smarter has trashed how own nice guy image. Game on.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    edited April 2023
    Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Well right now they’re winding up each other, while their opponents are laughing at them and producing mocking posters.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,097

    For those who don’t sneeringly dismiss Unheard out of hand:

    https://unherd.com/2023/04/how-thatcherism-outgrew-its-mistress/

    Good final paragraph.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216



    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    At least it’s on the economy, but it is novel to see Labour argue that the better off shouldn’t pay more or implicitly support council service cuts.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Yet we kept getting told the red wall has come back to Labour. Anybody would think the Labour party don't believe the polls.....or are sure about their leader....
  • Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Condemnation of labour's descent into gutter politics is being led by the guardian and many in Labour who are dismayed they have lost the moral ground overnight and in a manner Braverman would be proud

    Trying to portray Sunak as a friend of paedophiles is revolting and straight out of the Alastair Campbell playbook
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,977

    Sandpit said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Oh dear, what are they thinking? Nothing positive to say at all.

    Hope they like choosing the mud fight with the pigs, because the pigs are definitely going to enjoy it.
    The reaction of some PBers is actually quite funny, I decided to visit the PB thread the day Boris Johnson smeared Sir Keir Starmer over Jimmy Savile.

    For maximum lolz I may share the comments from that day of the PBers who cheered that smear but seem outraged by these ads.
    Look, all they’re saying is that Labour is the party of the moral high ground while the Tories are the party of nasty, smeary, negative politics. Seems remarkably honest to me.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,841
    Of course Douglas Ross is right in this. He has correctly assessed the real enemy who threaten the Union and he is willing to support the Soviet Union, sorry Labour, to fight it. Rishi thinks he has bigger fish to fry, and maybe he does, but in Scotland the efficiency of the Unionist vote needs to improve to take full advantage of the current SNP weakness.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,670
    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Well right now they’re winding up each other, while their opponents are laughing at them and producing mocking posters.
    Just like Labour did in 2009/2010.

    The smarter thing for the Tories to have done was to ignore it, It’s generally not the wisest thing to to to cede the agenda to the opposition.
  • Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Condemnation of labour's descent into gutter politics is being led by the guardian and many in Labour who are dismayed they have lost the moral ground overnight and in a manner Braverman would be proud

    Trying to portray Sunak as a friend of paedophiles is revolting and straight out of the Alastair Campbell playbook
    There you go again, it is straight out of the Tory playbook, or have you forgotten all those Tory MPs cheering Boris Johnson smearing Starmer over Savile?

    Or Braverman's comments on grooming gangs last week?
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,300

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Oh dear, the Labour party is going to aim for the man and not the ball when it comes to the next GE, its just a shame that they don't have a star goalscorer who will knock the campaign out of the park like Blair did in 1997. Lets hope that Keir Starmer doesn't keep taking a tumble at the beach when it comes to his personal polling...
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    @BNHWalker
    New post: Here's the thing with "trans issues" in the UK

    Most voters have an opinion, but the vast majority will readily admit to not paying it much attention. As a 𝘃𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲, it's next-to-nonexistent. 🧵

    sotn.newstatesman.com
    Do voters care about trans rights?

    https://twitter.com/BNHWalker/status/1643274157688274946?cxt=HHwWhIC22frIis4tAAAA
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,813

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    Good morning

    It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming

    Labour have opened a can of worms
    Its always offended me that Macdonalds serves breakfast util so late - Breakfast should only be available to those who can get their asses out of bed by 9 imho
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,232

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Labour haven't thought this through

    There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
    I’m not sure what I think of the Labour attack ads, but this does seem a little far fetched to me.

    Tory attack dog: “We should make a poster attacking Labour before the May
    elections, just like we always do.”

    Sunak: “Goodness no, we can’t do that!!
    Labour are so morally unimpeachable. I simply can’t countenance it!! ”

    Both look at Starmer’s Twitter feed.

    Sunak: “Sigh. I’m so disappointed in the state of British politics. Oh alright then. Unleash the hounds. Do your worst!”
  • Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Condemnation of labour's descent into gutter politics is being led by the guardian and many in Labour who are dismayed they have lost the moral ground overnight and in a manner Braverman would be proud

    Trying to portray Sunak as a friend of paedophiles is revolting and straight out of the Alastair Campbell playbook
    There you go again, it is straight out of the Tory playbook, or have you forgotten all those Tory MPs cheering Boris Johnson smearing Starmer over Savile?

    Or Braverman's comments on grooming gangs last week?
    I never endorsed Johnson comments nor Braverman's but you seem to want to defend the poster suggesting Sunak is a friend of paedophiles rather than condemn it

    This is Labour at war with itself over these gutter posters and you are just trying to deflect from this controversy
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Labour haven't thought this through

    There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
    Another problem is that the Corbyn era influx of MP's represents an endless goldmine for the tories to dig in to. Not to mention the radical groups still clinging on to the labour party. The conservatives can really damage Starmer with 'guilt by association'.

    It is just sad more than anything else. I honestly thought Starmer was trying to rise above all this. It is particularly sad that he, a KC and former DPP, can peddle such a misleading narrative on the courts and sentencing.

    It would be good to look in to the evidence of how other progressive parties have come to power around the world over the last decade, I am not convinced it is with these type of personal attacks.
  • Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Condemnation of labour's descent into gutter politics is being led by the guardian and many in Labour who are dismayed they have lost the moral ground overnight and in a manner Braverman would be proud

    Trying to portray Sunak as a friend of paedophiles is revolting and straight out of the Alastair Campbell playbook
    There you go again, it is straight out of the Tory playbook, or have you forgotten all those Tory MPs cheering Boris Johnson smearing Starmer over Savile?

    Or Braverman's comments on grooming gangs last week?
    I never endorsed Johnson comments nor Braverman's but you seem to want to defend the poster suggesting Sunak is a friend of paedophiles rather than condemn it

    This is Labour at war with itself over these gutter posters and you are just trying to deflect from this controversy
    I’m not defending the posters and I’ve said they are a mistake but I’m pointing your hypocrisy and that of the Tory Party.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    Now Starmer is writing op-ed pieces in the Daily Mail, of all places, doubling down on the strategy and accusing the Tories of being soft on crime, saying that a Labour government will increase minimum sentences.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html

    This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.
  • Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Well right now they’re winding up each other, while their opponents are laughing at them and producing mocking posters.
    Just like Labour did in 2009/2010.

    The smarter thing for the Tories to have done was to ignore it, It’s generally not the wisest thing to to to cede the agenda to the opposition.
    Where are you getting the narrative it is the conservatives leading the attack on these posters

    Haven't you read the guardian and listened to the media condemning the nature of them
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    DougSeal said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    @BNHWalker
    New post: Here's the thing with "trans issues" in the UK

    Most voters have an opinion, but the vast majority will readily admit to not paying it much attention. As a 𝘃𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲, it's next-to-nonexistent. 🧵

    sotn.newstatesman.com
    Do voters care about trans rights?

    https://twitter.com/BNHWalker/status/1643274157688274946?cxt=HHwWhIC22frIis4tAAAA
    They said the same about the EU right up to the exit poll.....
  • Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Condemnation of labour's descent into gutter politics is being led by the guardian and many in Labour who are dismayed they have lost the moral ground overnight and in a manner Braverman would be proud

    Trying to portray Sunak as a friend of paedophiles is revolting and straight out of the Alastair Campbell playbook
    There you go again, it is straight out of the Tory playbook, or have you forgotten all those Tory MPs cheering Boris Johnson smearing Starmer over Savile?

    Or Braverman's comments on grooming gangs last week?
    I never endorsed Johnson comments nor Braverman's but you seem to want to defend the poster suggesting Sunak is a friend of paedophiles rather than condemn it

    This is Labour at war with itself over these gutter posters and you are just trying to deflect from this controversy
    I’m not defending the posters and I’ve said they are a mistake but I’m pointing your hypocrisy and that of the Tory Party.
    Not mine when I did not endorse Johnson or Braverman's comments

    I support Sunak as I see him as a decent and competent PM and will defend him accordingly
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723

    Sandpit said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Oh dear, what are they thinking? Nothing positive to say at all.

    Hope they like choosing the mud fight with the pigs, because the pigs are definitely going to enjoy it.
    The reaction of some PBers is actually quite funny, I decided to visit the PB thread the day Boris Johnson smeared Sir Keir Starmer over Jimmy Savile.

    For maximum lolz I may share the comments from that day of the PBers who cheered that smear but seem outraged by these ads.
    Look, all they’re saying is that Labour is the party of the moral high ground while the Tories are the party of nasty, smeary, negative politics. Seems remarkably honest to me.
    You are immune to lies obviously
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    Sandpit said:

    Now Starmer is writing op-ed pieces in the Daily Mail, of all places, doubling down on the strategy and accusing the Tories of being soft on crime, saying that a Labour government will increase minimum sentences.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html

    This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.

    Getting an article in the Daily Mail that allows him to attack Sunak on crime and talk about Labour policy doesn’t look like backfiring to me. I’d imagine it’s exactly what Labour was aiming for. The unfortunate reality is that these kinds of ads work. I wish they didn’t.
  • Sandpit said:

    Now Starmer is writing op-ed pieces in the Daily Mail, of all places, doubling down on the strategy and accusing the Tories of being soft on crime, saying that a Labour government will increase minimum sentences.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html

    This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.

    Getting an article in the Daily Mail that allows him to attack Sunak on crime and talk about Labour policy doesn’t look like backfiring to me. I’d imagine it’s exactly what Labour was aiming for. The unfortunate reality is that these kinds of ads work. I wish they didn’t.
    The problem is the accompanying article and mail leader takes him apart
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    maxh said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Labour haven't thought this through

    There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
    I’m not sure what I think of the Labour attack ads, but this does seem a little far fetched to me.

    Tory attack dog: “We should make a poster attacking Labour before the May
    elections, just like we always do.”

    Sunak: “Goodness no, we can’t do that!!
    Labour are so morally unimpeachable. I simply can’t countenance it!! ”

    Both look at Starmer’s Twitter feed.

    Sunak: “Sigh. I’m so disappointed in the state of British politics. Oh alright then. Unleash the hounds. Do your worst!”
    Yep, the idea that the Tories weren’t going to be doing their own attack ads and using their surrogates in the media to go after Starmer personally is a bit far-fetched when they do it at every single election to every Labour leader. The unusual bit is Labour doing it first.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,977
    edited April 2023
    maxh said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Labour haven't thought this through

    There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
    I’m not sure what I think of the Labour attack ads, but this does seem a little far fetched to me.

    Tory attack dog: “We should make a poster attacking Labour before the May
    elections, just like we always do.”

    Sunak: “Goodness no, we can’t do that!!
    Labour are so morally unimpeachable. I simply can’t countenance it!! ”

    Both look at Starmer’s Twitter feed.

    Sunak: “Sigh. I’m so disappointed in the state of British politics. Oh alright then. Unleash the hounds. Do your worst!”
    One thing I’m slightly surprised about is SKS attaching himself directly to these ads, as you imply the usual formula is to have a bit of deniability while the pit bulls do the dirty work. I wonder if milquetoasty SKS has been tempted to try a bit of hard man of politics imagery.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,670
    edited April 2023

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Well right now they’re winding up each other, while their opponents are laughing at them and producing mocking posters.
    Just like Labour did in 2009/2010.

    The smarter thing for the Tories to have done was to ignore it, It’s generally not the wisest thing to to to cede the agenda to the opposition.
    Where are you getting the narrative it is the conservatives leading the attack on these posters

    Haven't you read the guardian and listened to the media condemning the nature of them
    And you think Labour doesn’t want this? They spent the last two years distancing themselves from the Guardian looking for a broader audience. You need to reflect about what is actually going on here,

    Essentially you keep banging on loudly on how Labour have changed.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,055

    Sandpit said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Oh dear, what are they thinking? Nothing positive to say at all.

    Hope they like choosing the mud fight with the pigs, because the pigs are definitely going to enjoy it.
    The reaction of some PBers is actually quite funny, I decided to visit the PB thread the day Boris Johnson smeared Sir Keir Starmer over Jimmy Savile.

    For maximum lolz I may share the comments from that day of the PBers who cheered that smear but seem outraged by these ads.
    Oh my God, you mean anonymous posters on a politics blog, many of whom treat their political affiliation like it’s a football team, aren’t entirely consistent in their views and are sometimes hypocritical? Story of the decade.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,794
    Good morning, everyone.

    Attacks might be tempting but they don't always work. I recall disagreeing with pro-EU types here who were giggling confidently about Cameron's 'little England' comments, as if attaching an insult to the majority of the electorate with the name of Farage would make it work.

    Starmer's over-egged the cake. His poll lead is so big the effect will likely be minimal, but this is a mistep nonetheless.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,977
    felix said:

    DougSeal said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    @BNHWalker
    New post: Here's the thing with "trans issues" in the UK

    Most voters have an opinion, but the vast majority will readily admit to not paying it much attention. As a 𝘃𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲, it's next-to-nonexistent. 🧵

    sotn.newstatesman.com
    Do voters care about trans rights?

    https://twitter.com/BNHWalker/status/1643274157688274946?cxt=HHwWhIC22frIis4tAAAA
    They said the same about the EU right up to the exit poll.....
    They said it in the recent Australian elections, and lo, it turned out to be the case. If I recall correctly evidence suggested that voters were actually turned off by the trans skeptic culture warriors.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,992
    An SNP MP has called for the party’s leadership race to be rerun because the timing of Peter Murrell’s arrest last week raised doubts about the “legitimacy” of Humza Yousaf’s win.

    Angus MacNeil said that the detention of Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon’s husband and the former SNP chief executive, meant there were “clearly questions to answer” about the six-week leadership campaign which led to the narrow victory of Yousaf, the “continuity candidate”, over Kate Forbes.

    It is alleged that Murrell, who quit his post last month after 20 years, personally intervened to shorten the duration of the contest after his wife’s resignation in mid-February as first minister and party leader.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/call-to-rerun-snp-leader-vote-after-peter-murrell-s-arrest-pnqfpdvhq
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,841
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    It is curious how Tories keep telling us, at length, how Labour have made a mistake, repeatedly citing a Labour poster. Reminds me of how Labour operated in 2009-2010.

    My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.

    Well right now they’re winding up each other, while their opponents are laughing at them and producing mocking posters.
    Just like Labour did in 2009/2010.

    The smarter thing for the Tories to have done was to ignore it, It’s generally not the wisest thing to to to cede the agenda to the opposition.
    Where are you getting the narrative it is the conservatives leading the attack on these posters

    Haven't you read the guardian and listened to the media condemning the nature of them
    And you think Labour doesn’t want this? They spent the last two years distancing themselves from the Guardian looking for a broader audience. You need to reflect about what is actually going on here,

    Essentially you keep banging on loudly on how Labour have changed.
    Indeed. You can only expel Corbyn so many times. Eventually you need a different drum.

    I find it hard to get excited about these posters. Its just politics and those who were deluded enough to believe that Labour are morally superior are the same people and mindset that have lost the last 4 elections. Starmer is playing to win, as he should.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,674

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    Good morning

    It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming

    Labour have opened a can of worms
    Its always offended me that Macdonalds serves breakfast util so late - Breakfast should only be available to those who can get their asses out of bed by 9 imho
    What about us poor people who party till 3am?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652

    Sandpit said:

    Now Starmer is writing op-ed pieces in the Daily Mail, of all places, doubling down on the strategy and accusing the Tories of being soft on crime, saying that a Labour government will increase minimum sentences.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html

    This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.

    Getting an article in the Daily Mail that allows him to attack Sunak on crime and talk about Labour policy doesn’t look like backfiring to me. I’d imagine it’s exactly what Labour was aiming for. The unfortunate reality is that these kinds of ads work. I wish they didn’t.
    The problem is the accompanying article and mail leader takes him apart
    That was going to happen anyway. Starmer getting a piece in the Mail is the new bit.

  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    Sandpit said:

    Now Starmer is writing op-ed pieces in the Daily Mail, of all places, doubling down on the strategy and accusing the Tories of being soft on crime, saying that a Labour government will increase minimum sentences.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html

    This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.

    Getting an article in the Daily Mail that allows him to attack Sunak on crime and talk about Labour policy doesn’t look like backfiring to me. I’d imagine it’s exactly what Labour was aiming for. The unfortunate reality is that these kinds of ads work. I wish they didn’t.
    Its not a bad article by Starmer in the Daily Mail. It is depressing because it is pandering to a public perception of an issue rather than perhaps the reality of it, but such is politics in a democracy.

    I think the problem here goes back to the personal attacks on Sunak.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652

    maxh said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Labour haven't thought this through

    There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
    I’m not sure what I think of the Labour attack ads, but this does seem a little far fetched to me.

    Tory attack dog: “We should make a poster attacking Labour before the May
    elections, just like we always do.”

    Sunak: “Goodness no, we can’t do that!!
    Labour are so morally unimpeachable. I simply can’t countenance it!! ”

    Both look at Starmer’s Twitter feed.

    Sunak: “Sigh. I’m so disappointed in the state of British politics. Oh alright then. Unleash the hounds. Do your worst!”
    One thing I’m slightly surprised about is SKS attaching himself directly to these ads, as you imply the usual formula is to have a bit of deniability while the pit bulls do the dirty work. I wonder if milquetoasty SKS has been tempted to try a bit of hard man of politics imagery.
    Yep - that’s the mistake, IMO. The Tories have always used Guido and their media cheerleaders for these kinds of attacks so that they get deniability. That’s what made the Johnson Saville smear so notable.

  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    edited April 2023
    Scott_xP said:

    An SNP MP has called for the party’s leadership race to be rerun because the timing of Peter Murrell’s arrest last week raised doubts about the “legitimacy” of Humza Yousaf’s win.

    Angus MacNeil said that the detention of Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon’s husband and the former SNP chief executive, meant there were “clearly questions to answer” about the six-week leadership campaign which led to the narrow victory of Yousaf, the “continuity candidate”, over Kate Forbes.

    It is alleged that Murrell, who quit his post last month after 20 years, personally intervened to shorten the duration of the contest after his wife’s resignation in mid-February as first minister and party leader.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/call-to-rerun-snp-leader-vote-after-peter-murrell-s-arrest-pnqfpdvhq

    Interesting that they want to rerun a 52-48 vote. Unprecedented.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    felix said:

    DougSeal said:

    Sandpit said:

    There are a lot of very hostile replies from small-l liberals in response to this tweet from Starmer. It might not filter through to the wider public but it does feel like there’s been a sea change following their ads targeting Sunak and people are less willing to give him a free pass for not being a Tory.

    https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881

    Two pictorial replies under that Tweet - one mocking the original, and the other attacking Sir Keir more directly.



    @BNHWalker
    New post: Here's the thing with "trans issues" in the UK

    Most voters have an opinion, but the vast majority will readily admit to not paying it much attention. As a 𝘃𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲, it's next-to-nonexistent. 🧵

    sotn.newstatesman.com
    Do voters care about trans rights?

    https://twitter.com/BNHWalker/status/1643274157688274946?cxt=HHwWhIC22frIis4tAAAA
    They said the same about the EU right up to the exit poll.....
    They said it in the recent Australian elections, and lo, it turned out to be the case. If I recall correctly evidence suggested that voters were actually turned off by the trans skeptic culture warriors.
    I recall a quote from one bitter Liberal politician that ScoMo had dedicated one entire week of the campaign to "trans shit".
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,042

    Scott_xP said:

    An SNP MP has called for the party’s leadership race to be rerun because the timing of Peter Murrell’s arrest last week raised doubts about the “legitimacy” of Humza Yousaf’s win.

    Angus MacNeil said that the detention of Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon’s husband and the former SNP chief executive, meant there were “clearly questions to answer” about the six-week leadership campaign which led to the narrow victory of Yousaf, the “continuity candidate”, over Kate Forbes.

    It is alleged that Murrell, who quit his post last month after 20 years, personally intervened to shorten the duration of the contest after his wife’s resignation in mid-February as first minister and party leader.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/call-to-rerun-snp-leader-vote-after-peter-murrell-s-arrest-pnqfpdvhq

    Interesting that they want to rerun a 52-48 vote. Unprecedented.
    Entirely consistent as they've spent the last nine years trying to re-run a 55-45 one.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,232
    edited April 2023

    Sandpit said:

    Now Starmer is writing op-ed pieces in the Daily Mail, of all places, doubling down on the strategy and accusing the Tories of being soft on crime, saying that a Labour government will increase minimum sentences.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html

    This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.

    Getting an article in the Daily Mail that allows him to attack Sunak on crime and talk about Labour policy doesn’t look like backfiring to me. I’d imagine it’s exactly what Labour was aiming for. The unfortunate reality is that these kinds of ads work. I wish they didn’t.
    The problem is the accompanying article and mail leader takes him apart
    @SouthamObserver is, I suspect, right on the tactics though.

    Having watched the Tory party do this many times, one truism is that each level of response and counter-response will get less attention. So whilst we have Starmer’s article linked here, no one has linked the accompanying op-ed by the paper. I bet far fewer will read it.

    In turn, far fewer will read the Twitter responses to the Labour ads than the ads themselves. And so they might achieve their aim. Like Southam, I wish it weren’t so, but I can’t decide if I blame Labour for recognising and responding to the reality of media campaigning.
  • UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 883
    darkage said:

    Sandpit said:

    Now Starmer is writing op-ed pieces in the Daily Mail, of all places, doubling down on the strategy and accusing the Tories of being soft on crime, saying that a Labour government will increase minimum sentences.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html

    This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.

    Getting an article in the Daily Mail that allows him to attack Sunak on crime and talk about Labour policy doesn’t look like backfiring to me. I’d imagine it’s exactly what Labour was aiming for. The unfortunate reality is that these kinds of ads work. I wish they didn’t.
    Its not a bad article by Starmer in the Daily Mail. It is depressing because it is pandering to a public perception of an issue rather than perhaps the reality of it, but such is politics in a democracy.

    I think the problem here goes back to the personal attacks on Sunak.
    I think what Starmer is banking on is the Government having to hit back. Rather than joining the Tories in the gutter, he's attempting to drag them into a fight about law and justice and he feels confident he can get the Tories on this. The adverts will continue until the Tories respond, and when they do, they'll highlight their own record.

    That's what I think the strategy is, anyway.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,670

    maxh said:

    Labour is to launch more “provocative and aggressive” adverts attacking Rishi Sunak this week by blaming him personally for crashing the economy and for soaring mortgage and council tax rates.

    The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.

    Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.

    The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.

    Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2

    Labour haven't thought this through

    There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
    I’m not sure what I think of the Labour attack ads, but this does seem a little far fetched to me.

    Tory attack dog: “We should make a poster attacking Labour before the May
    elections, just like we always do.”

    Sunak: “Goodness no, we can’t do that!!
    Labour are so morally unimpeachable. I simply can’t countenance it!! ”

    Both look at Starmer’s Twitter feed.

    Sunak: “Sigh. I’m so disappointed in the state of British politics. Oh alright then. Unleash the hounds. Do your worst!”
    One thing I’m slightly surprised about is SKS attaching himself directly to these ads, as you imply the usual formula is to have a bit of deniability while the pit bulls do the dirty work. I wonder if milquetoasty SKS has been tempted to try a bit of hard man of politics imagery.
    Yep - that’s the mistake, IMO. The Tories have always used Guido and their media cheerleaders for these kinds of attacks so that they get deniability. That’s what made the Johnson Saville smear so notable.

    The Tories attacked Starmer personally as a liberal lefty lawyer. I think he doesn’t mind one bit being attacked for being tough or aggressive on crime.
This discussion has been closed.