She regularly makes statements opposing the government’s position. In opposition she stepped down as shadow minister as she could not support the front bench position on Europe. She does not support cutting benefits for the disabled. If Starmer is not prepared to listen to those who campaigned
So she regularly & publicly undermines the govt she was elected to create? I get single issue opposition, I fervently disagree with several policies too (trans & PIP mostly), but unless she’s equally vocal about their many successes, then she’s doing herself & her constituents a disservice.
Also, Starmer DID listen and amend the disability cuts.
Eventually, after the political damage was done, he agreed to look again. Eventually, after the political damage was done, he amended the WFA (going too far the other way in the process). Eventually, after the political damage was done, he sacked Mandlesohn. Spot a pattern?
Of course she praises the things that the government does that she agrees with. But when the government does things that are the opposite of the values the party held in opposition then, of course, MPs are disheartened. They are being expected to turn on a sixpence.
for him or to his core voters, if he instead wishes to point his government towards Reform voters then the consequence of that will not be that reform voters will vote Labour instead, merely that they will feel more assured about supporting Reform, knowing that the PM thinks they have legitimate
He isn’t pointing his govt towards Reform voters though. They have bad comms, but they also have a completely hostile media, a media obsessed with clicks which frequently fails to report accurately & don’t report ANY negatives. Which policies/actions do you disagree with vs those you agree with?
I’ve addressed policies in another response, but the government can sort out a hostile media if it wants to. Ban foreign ownership of media. Force tv channels to be impartial. Ban X as it promotes extemisim (instead of it being the official channel of the government).
It can’t sort out the media if it want to do much else with it’s term. That would basically take all parliamentary time up.
Create more parliamentary time in that case. It would take no parliamentary time up to ban GBNews, to proscribe X as a terrorist organisation and to sack the right wingers at the BBC. None. Could be done in a day.
Yes, I agree. It’s the fallout that would absorb their time & narrative. Also, the backers would just rebrand (GBNEWS) & relaunch. There’d be issues around politically stacking the BBC board outside of the normal process, etc. I share the frustration, but these aren’t simple things to manage
I’m not talking about “stacking” the BBC. But it should not have senior personnel who have been closely associated with ANY political party, in the same way as would apply to the civil service. What is Lisa Nandy doing in her job? Absolutely sweet FA.
That’s how it would be perceived and spun regardless. Arguing that that wouldn’t be what actually happened whilst maintaining that Labour are no longer a centre left govt is ironic!
But the difference is that it wouldn’t be platforming Farage as if he was the official opposition. Imagine if the LibDems and Greens got as much coverage. How much good would that do? Meanwhile Reform are flying high in the polls and feted by the media. That is critical for Labour.
They may do, other media outlets still do it because he’s good for clicks. It’s not guaranteed to help, but IS guaranteed to harm them.
Stop posting populist rubbish like this, to an audience of Trump / Musk / Yaxley Lennon / Farage fans:
What has he said that is wrong? Was it wrong when he said similar things about Ames? He’s not supporting Kirk, he’s showing empathy and condemning political violence! 🤦
Ames was a British politician. There is no comparison whatsoever.
There absolutely is. Whether he was British or not is irrelevant.
Why did he need to say anything whatsoever about an extreme right wing American podcaster who few people had ever heard of in this country? What about it merited soothing words about his loved ones? What was gained by saying anything at all?
Because it’s an international event. I agree it shouldn’t be, but it is. Had he not said anything he would have been accused of appeasing the right with silence!
concerns. Cooper and Starmer have wrapped themselves in flags to appeal to the sort of person who went on the demo yesterday. There is no church broad enough to encompass them and socially liberal left of centre.
Again, this is rubbish. Immigration is a concern for 49% of the electorate. They have to address it, but every time they mention it, it’s claimed that they’re appealing to Reform or shifting right. Bizarrely, when the raise taxes on the highest earners or repeal anti TU laws they don’t shift left! 🤔
They don’t have to address it by appeasing racists. That never works. It is a concern for people who don’t understand how much we need immigration and how the alternative is to be poorer now and much poorer in the future.
If you think that, because Farage says things that are popular with some people, the government has to appeal to those people then I’d rather have Reform in power than a Farage tribute act who says that people like me gave him a mandate to act like that.
If you think that they are aping reform, you’re listening to the media, not Labour
Well if I, educated, intelligent, left of centre and a recent campaigner for Labour think that, even if you are right, and it is the media not Labour - what do you think everyone else thinks, and what is the government going to do about it? Shrug their shoulders?
I’m not sure what they can do about it. It might be worth considering if educated, intelligent, left of centre people might need to consider the information they absorb & spread a bit more critically? I’m not absolving Labour of responsibility or of making mistakes/having bad policy either.
If you are saying that I, and people like me, should shut up and trust the government, well no, we did that in order to get Labour elected. If they aren’t governing for me - and they aren’t - then I am going to let them know. I am this close to resigning my membership.
I don’t think you should shut up or trust the govt, just have a more realistic view of what they can realistically do and not complain about impossibilities. You said they should rejoin the SM & CU - how would you like them to achieve this magic trick?
Come the election voters will vote tactically, as they did last time, or - if they are still thoroughly disillusioned with Labour - they may not vote at all, and that will be the real danger. Labour, the government, is taking for granted the votes of far too many people. It needs to wake up.
Wake up & do what? Jail Farage? Close down GB News? Release weekly statements about how they think racism is wrong? Remove all flags? What?
Leveson 2. Release Russia report. Sack the BBC board and ensure that it has a fair coverage of politics and does not sensationalise news. Yes, close down GBNews. It does not have a shred of impartiality. Ban X - it is a platform that is promoting extreme views. Reverse the stupid decision re
Palestine Action. Add 2p to income tax. Apply to rejoin single market and customs union. Introduce safe routes to apply for asylum. Explain the need for immigration. Introduce a fairer voting system than FPTP. Nationalise Thames Water. Reduce electricity prices. Job done.
Great, so massively load up our already staggering national debt, and secure the election for Farage! Brilliant! I wonder why they aren’t doing that!🤔
2p on income tax would go a be try long way and, as you know, wouldn’t add to the national debt at all.
No, but it would break Labour’s biggest electoral promise. That would be endlessly repeated and spun. Any benefit to it would be lost.
The benefit would be the economic gain. Instead they have upset people on all sides whilst tinkering around the edges, demonising the vulnerable, upsetting the old and then u-turning when it backfires. And they are still left where they were a year ago.