Why are you voting Labour? - Another election poll

[P-Jay]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Fermit said:

I always voted Blair, simply because he was more capable than Major/ William Hague/ IDS/ Michael Howard. The one and only time I voted Tory was for Boris, not because I liked him, but because Corbyn would have been a disaster.

Voted Labour this time, as the Torys don't deserve to be in power. Austerity which never ended, record tax highs, sleaze (who'd have thunk it!) Rishi helping out his rich mates and relatives. I could never vote for the pound shop Enoch Powell that is Farage, so that just leaves Labour. Personally, I'd prefer them if Rachel Reeves was PM, but as number 2 I think she'll do a decent job.

With any luck, as much as I loath NF, I hope that reform become the opposition. The Torys could do with being the third party for a while, so that their long held view within that they 'have the right to govern' is completely quashed.

You do know that Starmer is on 365 thousand pounds a year don't you? Do you know how many times Blair is a millionaire?
They are all
as bad as each other, Any one who thinks they are not, is just kidding themselves.

"All as bad as each other".

There is absolutely nothing wrong in being successful, it's not a Labour dirty secret that some of them are quite wealthy.

The day Labour MPs start handing over millions of pounds of public money to their mates, or having their illegitimate children made peers etc etc and indeed etc, then I'll join you.

[The Gauge]

I voted labour today simply because in my opinion the best chance of getting the current government out of power is to vote labour, any other vote could have been ineffective.

I now fear a labour government, but not as much as I feared the current tory one.

[z4RRSchris]

voted labour for the first time,

when they get michelle mone to give back the cash she stole off the tax payer ill vote tory again. until then they can get fked.

[PositronicRay]

I always thought politics was about communication, the only info we've received from our Labour candidate was this postcard.





Struggling to decipher it with reading glasses, I may need a magnifying glass.

[768]

Must be bad times for the NHS if doctors are out canvassing.

[PositronicRay]

768 said:

Must be bad times for the NHS if doctors are out canvassing.

I'd try to find out but no mention of a name.

[philv]

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

[E63eeeeee...]

philv said:

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

I'd be fine voting for a far left socialist government, if one was on offer. As it is, I've voted for a moderate left party and am going to get a centrist ex-Progress MP (because I live in one of the safest Labour seats in the country) and at best a centre-left government. I don't know what election you're talking about but it's not the one going on in the UK where nobody is getting 62% of the vote. Starmer looks to be on track to get about the same share as Corbyn did in 2017, and still win by a mile. How people can keep defending FPTP baffles me.

[PositronicRay]

philv said:

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

They're not really that far left are they? Anyway who's to blame?

[Randy Winkman]

PositronicRay said:

philv said:

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

They're not really that far left are they? Anyway who's to blame?

Exactly. Far left socialist government? Is Donald Trump on PH?

[bigpriest]

philv said:

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

By that rhetoric, the alternative is to vote back in a far right racist government who are intent on lining their own pockets at the expense of the country's infrastructure. Would any sane person vote for continued self-destruction?

[bitchstewie]

philv said:

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

Roll the dice or give five more years to a bunch of crooks and dog-whistle racists who've overseen fourteen years of managed decline and a fall in living standards during a Parliamentary term for the first time in living memory.

Hmm that's a tough one and it seems most of the country agrees.

[Silvanus]

philv said:

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

Far left? Think your political barometer is broken

[Pan Pan Pan]

2xChevrons said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

The fire at Grenfell tower happened, because a change in Part L of the Building Regulations, which
required building owners, to upgrade the thermal insulation characteristics of an existing building, where the cost of remedial works above a certain figure was to be carried out. resulted in the building being clad in an unsuitable insulation material. A change introduced, when labour were last in power. So perhaps you should also say that the labour party can get f*cked?

Did the Labour legislation require use of a non-compliant cladding due to lax regulation and unwelcome cost pressures on local government?

If government A introduces a law mandating airbags in cars, then government B deregulates the car industry and reduces funding for the body charged with certifying and inspecting airbag installations...and then a non-compliant airbag fails and kills the driver, is government A to blame?

No they did not. If regulations had been in place when AD L was changed, to ensure that only a non combustible cladding could be used on the external face of buildings, then Grenfell might not have happened. No such requirement was put in place when ADL was changed. The old labour fault of unforeseen consequences took place.

[Tommo87]

P-Jay said:

"All as bad as each other".

There is absolutely nothing wrong in being successful, it's not a Labour dirty secret that some of them are quite wealthy.

The day Labour MPs start handing over millions of pounds of public money to their mates, or having their illegitimate children made peers etc etc and indeed etc, then I'll join you.

You mean Madleson don’t you?

(Although NOT the children bit).

Edited by Tommo87 on Friday 5th July 10:02

[Tommo87]

PositronicRay said:

philv said:

62% voting for a far left socialist government intent on large scale changes because they've had enough of the tories.
God help us.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 62% know what they are voting for seeing as sks is a bit sly on this.

Or are we ok to just roll the dice on this?

They're not really that far left are they? Anyway who's to blame?

It was definitely an ‘anyone else but Tories’ (or SNP in scotland) election.

Very much a case of letting someone else have a go to try and fix it/ not happy with the country since Brexit and Covid.

There were some basic non party centric stats on tele this morning, which showed that voters spread across ALL the other candidates creating some larger than previously seen in nearly every constituency,

One of the statistics that did shock me, was that less people voted Labour this election, than they did last election, when Corbin was leader. Yet they still won a lot of seats with lower votes, because the remainder of the voting public was spread across the other candidates at higher than usual percentages.

[RizzoTheRat]

Tommo87 said:

One of the statistics that did shock me, was that less people voted Labour this election, than they did last election, when Corbin was leader. Yet they still won a lot of seats with lower votes, because the remainder of the voting public was spread across the other candidates at higher than usual percentages.

Part of that will be the drop in turnout, 60% this time compared to 67& in 2019, but yes amazing how big a difference in the result when labour went from 32.1% to 33.7% of the vote.

Here in NL we have proportional representation, and they just formed a government this week after an election in November, so there's downsides to that too.

[LimaDelta]

RizzoTheRat said:

Here in NL we have proportional representation, and they just formed a government this week after an election in November, so there's downsides to that too.

Genuine question - if the country can manage without a functioning government for eight months, then is it actually a downside?

[Pitre]

Liz Truss was my MP. Tactical? Spot on....

[RizzoTheRat]

LimaDelta said:

Genuine question - if the country can manage without a functioning government for eight months, then is it actually a downside?

IMO, not much of one Belgium survived without one for nearly 2 years. However both NL and BEL have pretty strong regional/federal governments that can bring in provincial regulations so long as they comply with national law.

The problem is that while the system can keep ticking over nothing new can happen, so if you get a big issue like Covid or Ukraine crop up that's outside the normal expectations, they wouldn't have been able to deal with it.