Reddit refugee

  • 3 Posts
  • 20 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle





  • Look, I’m not happy with what Starmer and Co have done so far in aggregate, but the PLP would be signing its own death warrant if they engaged in the type or psychodrama which the Tories did over the last 5 years.

    A good amount of MPs already know they will likely lose their seats in 2029, but a) trying to accelerate that is not in their interest, b) the circumstances are fucked, and won’t change with someone new in charge.

    Economically, we’re still going cap in hand to the bond markets, we still have an incredibly hostile press, and there is little to no community cohesion to resist negative stories along “dual power” lines.

    None of that changes with Burnham, or an SCG-aligned alternative.









  • Totally, and the point I was glibly implying was that the Greens are much more likely to take votes from the Lib Dems and Labour, than they are the Tories or Reform. As such, the circumstances for a Reform+Con minority looking for further coalition partners are where the Lab/Dem/Green vote has split and caused Ref/Con to get more seats than they actually should have.

    I’m hoping that when 2029 rocks up we see a repeat of 2025, where the tactical votes play out correctly and we get some combination of Lab gov and Lib/Green opposition. I’m so sick and tired of right wing opposition to centrism (at best).









  • I wonder if the canary realise that they are making the same argument here as was made to not give women the vote. Namely, that a married couple will have the same views.

    Granted, I do struggle to see how anyone could be married to a lobbist - let alone for arms - but association is not proof of a view.

    Is there a risk? Sure, and it needs to be recorded as a potential conflict of interests and managed correctly - and, again, given all the other dumb shit that has happened this week I am sceptical that that has happened - but the assertion being made here is not a good look, at best, and arguably misogynistic at worst.


  • There are many, many, things you can criticise Labour under Starmer for, but “neo-Thatcherite” is laughable, and is about the level of political insight I’d expect from the canary.

    Last I checked, Maggie didn’t nationalise rail companies, or increase workers rights, or a mass house building programme, or make targeted investment in the north, or have an industrial policy, or put billions in to renewables. In fact, come to think of it, she did the exact opposite of every one of these things.

    Am I happy with Labour right now? No. But not everything short of fully seizing the means of production is Thatcherite, and to pretend it is gives the dead bitch far too much credit, and minimises the level of damage she and her ilk did to the country.

    Edit - typos etc.