"Currants Bw..."

[GP]

Tony Blair is the best Prime Minister of my lifetime.

Make of that what you will.

[Xhaka Can’t]

I agree in respect of Tony Blair being the best PM.

I don’t know what the hell happened to him in respect of Iraq. But there are a lot of people in Ireland that are alive today because of his commitment to the Irish peace process - John Major also deserves credit for this.

He also achieved in terms of levelling up before it was a thing by introducing the national minimum wage, despite howls of protest from employer groups and the opposition. That, more than anything, reduced corporate welfare and contributed to an increased standard of living amongst the weakest in society without a voice.

It is some contrast with the completely self absorbed slob we have for a PM now. He doesn’t really give a damn about levelling up - it is a catchphrase and all he will do is put lipstick on a pig.

As for Ireland, it was clear that Brexit, inflicted on Ireland by England, would lead to increased tension, a risk of return to violence and breaches of the GFA. But Johnson didn’t give a fuck because people’s lives pale into insignificance with his pursuit for power.

[Coney]

It is some contrast with the completely self absorbed slob we have for a PM now. He doesn’t really give a damn about levelling up - it is a catchphrase and all he will do is put lipstick on a pig.

As for Ireland, it was clear that Brexit, inflicted on Ireland by England, would lead to increased tension, a risk of return to violence and breaches of the GFA. But Johnson didn’t give a fuck because people’s lives pale into insignificance with his pursuit for power.

[GP]

Brexit

Tories

This country is in a bad, bad way.

[Ollie the Optimist]

What the Labour party are doing is the same crap they went through in the 1980s. The problem is that they seem to think that policies are what gets you an election win. Sadly, that is not the case.

Thatcher and Blair both got 100+ seat majorities but nothing to do with policies. They were up against Jim Calaghan and John Major, both not really dynamic personalities, both in charge of a party at war internally, their main argument being 'the other side couldn't do any better. Meanwhile Thatcher and Blair were taking the 'I know how to make everything really good' pitch. People voted for the positive statement.

There was a survey after Thatcher came to power. They asked people if they agreed with various policies, not attributing the policy to one side or the other. It turned out that while a lot of people thought Thatcher was the right leader, they simultaneously did not like the policies she represented.

Until the election a few days ago, I had no particular problem with Starmer in terms of policies. However, he is a wet blanket and is never going to get the majority of people to believe he is going to be a good leader. (After the election, when he immediately sacked Angela Rayner, blaming her instead of his lack lustre image, he went right down in my esteem - not that he was particularly high in the first place.)

What the Labour Party need to realise is that while they argue the toss about whether their policies are exactly perfect in this or that member's opinion, they are not getting elected and people at the bottom of the heap that they are supposed to be helping are left in limbo. The first rule of real politics is 'get elected'. Until you do, everything you say and argue about is an irrelevance. Better to compromise on policy, get elected and at least get something done the way you want, rather than lose elections. Maybe you managed to say how clever and wonderful you are putting your principles first, but maybe also consider that because you did, the people you are supposed to be helping carry on suffering.

You make some very fair & interesting points. I do think leaders matter as you say and that was shown in 2019. Corbyn certainly ran on a “positive statement” if you like but people did not trust him at all. They all though Johnson was a better leader. Of course many other issues in that election but i think the polling afterwards showed corbyn was a bigger factor then brexit. People just didnt trust him, no matter if his policies may have been popular.


One issue i do have with you comments on Rayner is about her sacking. She was in charge of the national election campagin which was a failure. Labour lost many councils & councillors while tories made gains 11 years into government. While fully accepting that Starmer is leader, others do have responsibility so is it taht bad if they are held accountable for failing in their role?

[Letters]

The question is, why do people trust Boris? I mean yes yes, he's funny and ha ha ha, look at his hair!
The affable bumbling character he plays is depressingly effective. But he wouldn't know the truth if it smacked him in the face.
He's been sacked more than once for lying.
I sort of get why he's popular but it's frustrating that people don't think a bit deeper than "good old Boris! Ha ha ha, wiff-waff!"

[Ollie the Optimist]

The question is, why do people trust Boris? I mean yes yes, he's funny and ha ha ha, look at his hair!
The affable bumbling character he plays is depressingly effective. But he wouldn't know the truth if it smacked him in the face.
He's been sacked more than once for lying.
I sort of get why he's popular but it's frustrating that people don't think a bit deeper than "good old Boris! Ha ha ha, wiff-waff!"

There was quite a good article on this last week but annoyingly i cant remember where i read it. Could have been new statesmen, I’ll have a look.

But i think it’s because despite his background, he can relate to people. People flock to him unlike other politicians. Hes not a wooden soundbite man like May or Cameron or Miliband. Corbyn had an element of that appeal but only really to his followers, boris somehow seems to attract people unlikely to vote tory as in london 2008 & 2019 election.

I suspect also in 2019, while people trusted Johnson over corbyn, there was quite a strong element of trusting the leader with a good cabinet behind him so it wasnt just the leader themselves. Mcdonell, Abbott, Burgon all are crap politicians who should be no where near government and i suspect that also played a part.

[Ollie the Optimist]

I also think labour need to come up with a better attack on Johnson then they currently do.

They are attacking a tory party from the 90s not hte current tory party. One of the reason the tory party is so successful is they adapt to the electorate as required in order to win.

This tory party are winning in places they have never won before, clearly the attacks of upper class toffs etc aren’t working. This tory party is spending (or at least promising to spend) huge amounts of money up north, they raising corporation tax etc. Yet labour seem to attack the party as they are lowering them or not spending money, they are attacking a party that doenst, at least right now, appear to exist.

The problem labour have is if Johnson & the tories follow through on their promises on investment up north. The tories will be able to say, you voted for us as he promised to do x,y & z and we did them. Labour will have no answer to that.Of course, if the tories fail to deliver on their promises then the usual attack lines of “they lied to gain your vote and ignored it once given” may work.

[Coney]

I also think labour need to come up with a better attack on Johnson then they currently do.

They are attacking a tory party from the 90s not hte current tory party. One of the reason the tory party is so successful is they adapt to the electorate as required in order to win.

This tory party are winning in places they have never won before, clearly the attacks of upper class toffs etc aren’t working. This tory party is spending (or at least promising to spend) huge amounts of money up north, they raising corporation tax etc. Yet labour seem to attack the party as they are lowering them or not spending money, they are attacking a party that doenst, at least right now, appear to exist.

The problem labour have is if Johnson & the tories follow through on their promises on investment up north. The tories will be able to say, you voted for us as he promised to do x,y & z and we did them. Labour will have no answer to that.Of course, if the tories fail to deliver on their promises then the usual attack lines of “they lied to gain your vote and ignored it once given” may work.

I agree Labour are failing to adapt to the current situation. Tbf, the last year has been a problem with the Covid effect. The push on vaccination (which it is perfectly possible that Labour would also have done) has given the government a boost. On top of that, given the situation, it is difficult for an opposition to attack on other fronts when Covid is the headline issue.

Labour need to get themselves sorted out over the course of this year - ideally with a decent credible leader with character - ready to go on the attack next spring.

[IBK]

I also think labour need to come up with a better attack on Johnson then they currently do.

They are attacking a tory party from the 90s not hte current tory party. One of the reason the tory party is so successful is they adapt to the electorate as required in order to win.

This tory party are winning in places they have never won before, clearly the attacks of upper class toffs etc aren’t working. This tory party is spending (or at least promising to spend) huge amounts of money up north, they raising corporation tax etc. Yet labour seem to attack the party as they are lowering them or not spending money, they are attacking a party that doenst, at least right now, appear to exist.

The problem Labour have is if Johnson & the tories follow through on their promises on investment up north. The tories will be able to say, you voted for us as he promised to do x,y & z and we did them. Labour will have no answer to that.Of course, if the tories fail to deliver on their promises then the usual attack lines of “they lied to gain your vote and ignored it once given” may work.

The Tories have shown themselves to be the ulimate opportunists, and far better at sensing the public mood than Labour. They understand that there is no longer a 'left' and 'right' in the tracditional sense. They have stolen the cultural initiative, that is all about national pride and freedom to make choices (see Brexit; statues; NHS; freedom of expression etc), while undercutting Labour's economic appeal (committment to public spending; massive financial support during Coronavirus; investment promises). Meantime, Labour has become assoiciated with a 'liberal' elite; preaching about moral and social issues; equivoical about Brexit and stuck in the past. Moving to the traditional 'centre' of politics isn't going to work, and anyway noone trusts a party riven by internal ideological conflict (with an undercurrent of antisemitism thrown in).

The shocking thing is that everyone knows that the Tories are corrupt and self-serving, but noone seems to care, as long as they hold out their (calculated) promises.

You are right - the one thing that may change the public mood is when the Tories fail to deliver on their promises. But this will depend in large part on the economy. If things are OK on this front then I see no way back for Labour in its current form...