In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I have met a few Marinas, one is a Spanish lady.
My dad had a Marina too. Perhaps Boris is collecting wives with British Leyland car model names. Carrie might be in for a shock, unless Princess (Nut, Nuts) is allowable.
It's truly terrifying that people have been convicted to death row by people that believe this shit. If they're buying this nonsense, what sort of plea bargaining crap have prosecutors got felons to state to save their own skins in order to send others to the chair ? Now that might sound a bit tangential but half the potential jury members of the US seem unsafe right now, and more than that in the deep south.
That is a disturbing thought. Not just on the jury but possibly on the bench too.
The number of votes cast outweighs the number of eligible voters to cast them. Which is a pretty neat trick, if true.
Still, as the voter in the Dunny on the Wold election, a mister E Blackadder, said, I liked our candidate so much I voted for him 16,000 times
I think you can register as you walk up to vote.
That wasn't the issue in Detroit. It wasn't an "over 100% turnout" issue but trivial and common discrepancies (low single figures per precinct) between initial count of number of ballots received and totals once they'd been through the counting machines.
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I've never met a Carrie but any time I hear her name I think of Princess Leia, so its not a completely unheard of name.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
I could quibble - esp with that plus 40 - but I won't since at least you're getting into the spirit of it. I like these number style analyses. It is all about the numbers after all.
+40 Labour's Woke Bollocks
You are not going to quibble with Bluestofblues about it? having told me, it doesn’t resonate with the general public, there is no I am woke form to get signed off to enter the Labour tent, and woke bollocks is definitely not building a big anti labour coalition, where any old rubbish can be made up by enemies, associated with labours woke badges and medals, and believed by this anti woke majority?
Can I take this as a sign you are actually thinking about it?
No, of course I recognize both the strategy - of painting Labour as a hive of crazy pol pots intent on a ground zero re-imagining of society where the beleaguered white male is tarred and feathered in public if he puts a word out of place - and the danger of it working. But my sincere and considered view is that we've peaked with that stuff. It will still resonate with some - course it will - but its glory days are over. One, because Labour under Starmer won't be playing. Two, because as in the US if you insist on doing that polarization, forcing the binary, there will be a modest but decisive majority against.
I.e. if it comes to it, the woke soy libs will be defeated as hard as Biden was
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
My general impression of this is you are someone who has totally bought into the alt right view of the left. We know how embedded that can be so I doubt little old me will be able to do much. But I think you'll find the public are not of similar mind. They are imo extremely unlikely in 2024 to confuse Starmer Labour with outre, ultra progressive culture warriors. The Starmer strategy - isam's bedroom wall photo of him taking a knee notwithstanding - is to not major on that stuff. To substantially disengage. Leave the other side punching at air. Or creating fantasies like you here.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
The one thing Boris does not do, in contrast to so many Labour folks is to suggest that the people whose votes he wants to win from Labour etc are verminous scum. He actually wants to attract new voters. This rather than intellect is the cultural difference.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
I could quibble - esp with that plus 40 - but I won't since at least you're getting into the spirit of it. I like these number style analyses. It is all about the numbers after all.
+40 Labour's Woke Bollocks
You are not going to quibble with Bluestofblues about it? having told me, it doesn’t resonate with the general public, there is no I am woke form to get signed off to enter the Labour tent, and woke bollocks is definitely not building a big anti labour coalition, where any old rubbish can be made up by enemies, associated with labours woke badges and medals, and believed by this anti woke majority?
Can I take this as a sign you are actually thinking about it?
No, of course I recognize both the strategy - of painting Labour as a hive of crazy pol pots intent on a ground zero re-imagining of society where the beleaguered white male is tarred and feathered in public if he puts a word out of place - and the danger of it working. But my sincere and considered view is that we've peaked with that stuff. It will still resonate with some - course it will - but its glory days are over. One, because Labour under Starmer won't be playing. Two, because as in the US if you insist on doing that polarization, forcing the binary, there will be a modest but decisive majority against.
I.e. if it comes to it, the woke soy libs will be defeated as hard as Biden was
Except that the whole beauty of Biden is that he is the antithesis of a woke, word-policing soy-boy. But the voters took one look at the dross in the rest of the party, and said 'Fewer House seats, and no Senate for you, thanks'...
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
My general impression of this is you are someone who has totally bought into the alt right view of the left. We know how embedded that can be so I doubt little old me will be able to do much. But I think you'll find the public are not of similar mind. They are imo extremely unlikely in 2024 to confuse Starmer Labour with outre, ultra progressive culture warriors. The Starmer strategy - isam's bedroom wall photo of him taking a knee notwithstanding - is to not major on that stuff. To substantially disengage. Leave the other side punching at air. Or creating fantasies like you here.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
What about
“ If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere”
You agree, the world isn’t made fair, and this impacts on politics?
Is it true though? There has always been a bit of tension between right wingers and dries in the Conservative party. Right wingers hate the BBC for not playing Land of Hope and Glory enough, dries hate the BBC for not being economically competitive. Right wingers want Brexit to bring more industry back to Britain, dries want Brexit to push even more industry offshore. Right wingers are somewheres, dries are anywheres, maybe even nowheres.
In 2019, that didn't matter. Dries and right wingers united in wanting Brexit Done (even though they haven't and won't agree about what to do with the resulting freedoms) and Corbyn done over. In Boris Johnson, they also had the ideal candidate to tapdance round the contradiction in their respective visions. But the contradiction hasn't gone away, and it's hard to see how the stars will align so favourably in 2024.
And that's before we consider the tension between those strands of Conservative thinking and Carrie's Conservatism (which seems to be Brexity Cameroonism) and the scattered remains of the One Nation tradition...
Not to mention the Northern Research Group. Who want higher spending on houses and infrastructure. And the southern Shire Tories who want less. I suspect the economic choices at the next election will be drastic spending cuts, higher taxes, or both. It is difficult to see a Tory Party speaking with one voice comfortably to its vast coalition.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
My general impression of this is you are someone who has totally bought into the alt right view of the left. We know how embedded that can be so I doubt little old me will be able to do much. But I think you'll find the public are not of similar mind. They are imo extremely unlikely in 2024 to confuse Starmer Labour with outre, ultra progressive culture warriors. The Starmer strategy - isam's bedroom wall photo of him taking a knee notwithstanding - is to not major on that stuff. To substantially disengage. Leave the other side punching at air. Or creating fantasies like you here.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
What about
“ If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere”
You agree, the world isn’t made fair, and this impacts on politics?
If your point is that a coalition is harder to construct and hold together where its members disagree on many important things, then yes I agree. But that can be counteracted if the total potential numbers for the coalition are greater to start with than the other side has - e.g. Dems vs Reps in the US. And also I'm not sure that Starmer Labour will be less "tight" and coherent than the Cons in 24. The Cons have to defend seats in very different areas with very different interests and dynamics and demographics. Unless they just go for the "Trad" White Vote, which I can't see working here.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
The problem for the Republicans is not the observing of the votes but the casting of them by Americans. Too much of this going on and they tend to come second. This is why they view the act with such suspicion. It's perfectly rational. In their eyes the denizen of a big city intending to partake in an election might as well be purchasing a balaclava and casing their house.
If both sides can't directly observe the counting process in the new US mail in ballot system and in some cases are frozen out of the entire process for hours at a time, its game over. The rest is window dressing.
Please provide a link to evidence that what you postulate actually happened anywhere.
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I've never met a Carrie but any time I hear her name I think of Princess Leia, so its not a completely unheard of name.
No. Carrie's War too and the scary film.
I not only have met a Carrie, but it is my good fortune to have married her. She ain't a Caroline either.
It's truly terrifying that people have been convicted to death row by people that believe this shit. If they're buying this nonsense, what sort of plea bargaining crap have prosecutors got felons to state to save their own skins in order to send others to the chair ? Now that might sound a bit tangential but half the potential jury members of the US seem unsafe right now, and more than that in the deep south.
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I have met a few Marinas, one is a Spanish lady.
My dad had a Marina too. Perhaps Boris is collecting wives with British Leyland car model names. Carrie might be in for a shock, unless Princess (Nut, Nuts) is allowable.
The Marina was an absolute dog. I learned to drive on one, and discovered it really didn't like cornering at speed.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
I thought I`d chuck my tuppence in on this.
I prefer Corbyn to Starmer because he is truer to the ideology on which the LP is based. He is honest and authentic.
Starmer, whilst impressive from a "you can see him as PM" point of view, is dishonest and false.
I`ve stopped watching PMQs because it`s got to the point that I can`t stand either the sight or sound of him, to be honest.
Electorally, if that`s all you care about, then the LP may be on to something with Starmer. But I`m not even convinced about that.
Interesting. Although I don't think you're up for grabs, are you?
I liked many aspects of the Corbyn era too. Although not so much the man - really not fit for PM - but the broad political direction. Indicated to me a party throwing off the Murdoch and Dacre cringe and becoming serious about change. Indeed I joined because of that vibe. I'd always voted Labour but was never a member until 2017.
But I like Starmer too and I know he has to tack more to the centre. I hope not so far as to lose all the buzz but we will see. Whatever. He's the man now. And I am sick of losing elections.
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I have met a few Marinas, one is a Spanish lady.
My dad had a Marina too. Perhaps Boris is collecting wives with British Leyland car model names. Carrie might be in for a shock, unless Princess (Nut, Nuts) is allowable.
The Marina was an absolute dog. I learned to drive on one, and discovered it really didn't like cornering at speed.
Ours had a badly balanced prop shaft which vibrated through the steering wheel at precisely 70 mph. It was purchased new by my dad on August 1st 1977. It was having the transmission replaced on August 2nd. My first company car was a top of the range (no really) Ital.
The number of votes outweighs the number of eligible voters. Which is a pretty neat trick, if true.
Which it won't be.
Link?
Twit?
Just to explain 'twit?'.
You serious think that Trump and Trump alone has just noticed that there are more votes than voters after all this time and nobody else just happened not to stumble over that fact after all the fatuous court cases.
And you want me to provide you with a link?!
How about you providing a link or better still Trump doing so rather than spewing out a lot of crap based upon nothing (that applies to you and Trump).
No that's a fool's errand. Seeking to disprove arrant nonsense.
Or to go all Christopher Hitchens macho debater style - "What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
My general impression of this is you are someone who has totally bought into the alt right view of the left. We know how embedded that can be so I doubt little old me will be able to do much. But I think you'll find the public are not of similar mind. They are imo extremely unlikely in 2024 to confuse Starmer Labour with outre, ultra progressive culture warriors. The Starmer strategy - isam's bedroom wall photo of him taking a knee notwithstanding - is to not major on that stuff. To substantially disengage. Leave the other side punching at air. Or creating fantasies like you here.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
The one thing Boris does not do, in contrast to so many Labour folks is to suggest that the people whose votes he wants to win from Labour etc are verminous scum. He actually wants to attract new voters. This rather than intellect is the cultural difference.
It's sadly true that a lack of values and a willingness to say whatever people want to hear can be an electoral asset.
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I've never met a Carrie but any time I hear her name I think of Princess Leia, so its not a completely unheard of name.
PCP is very different to PCH...PCP is just a different form of financing, you are still agreeing to actually buy the car. Totally unsurprising most people use finance to purchase new cars (although some concern that like houses in 2008 too many people over stretching themselves).
PCH ie. Leasing, is really popular in places like the US, but here outside higher end cars, here, it often poor deal for your standard £15k car.
You never actually own the car outright in PCP though – unless you pay the bubble at the end. And why would you do that? You might as well replace it with a more modern vehicle!
Paying for the bubble at the end is, however, precisely what you should aim to do. That way you get interest free (mostly) finance for the first three years, plus the insurance of knowing that if you land with a lemon you can ditch it, and the amount you pay in the third year is pitched to be almost certainly less than the car is worth (so that if you hand it back the plan provider is in profit). Plus all the mileage restrictions etc. become irrelevant if you buy the car.
The plan is however designed to encourage you to do what you suggest, and trade in for another new car, keeping a similar monthly payment. You don’t have a car to trade in, of course, so are hit with another up front deposit. Add the stream of deposits you are paying to the monthly premium and you are effectively paying for the early years depreciation over and over.
The front loaded depreciation becomes irrelevant if you keep the car for eight years or so, which is how PCP becomes a financial winner.
Comments
My dad had a Marina too. Perhaps Boris is collecting wives with British Leyland car model names. Carrie might be in for a shock, unless Princess (Nut, Nuts) is allowable.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2020/nov/18/us-election-donald-trump-joe-biden-chris-krebs-coronavirus-covid-19-live-updates
NEW THREAD
She ain't a Caroline either.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/11/cheri-beasley-paul-newby-north-carolina-supreme-court-recount-racism.html
I learned to drive on one, and discovered it really didn't like cornering at speed.
I liked many aspects of the Corbyn era too. Although not so much the man - really not fit for PM - but the broad political direction. Indicated to me a party throwing off the Murdoch and Dacre cringe and becoming serious about change. Indeed I joined because of that vibe. I'd always voted Labour but was never a member until 2017.
But I like Starmer too and I know he has to tack more to the centre. I hope not so far as to lose all the buzz but we will see. Whatever. He's the man now. And I am sick of losing elections.
Or to go all Christopher Hitchens macho debater style - "What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
The plan is however designed to encourage you to do what you suggest, and trade in for another new car, keeping a similar monthly payment. You don’t have a car to trade in, of course, so are hit with another up front deposit. Add the stream of deposits you are paying to the monthly premium and you are effectively paying for the early years depreciation over and over.
The front loaded depreciation becomes irrelevant if you keep the car for eight years or so, which is how PCP becomes a financial winner.