Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
President Merkin said:
turbobloke said:
Clearly meddlesome interference is still possibe arising from unelected non-UK supranational bloat.
Thank goodness for Brexit. No Party is offering to try rejoining, certainly not Labour and SKS who has also ruled out any SM CU nonsense. However this is Capt FlipFlop so we'll have to wait and see what Rayner wants.
Picking the two diamonds out of that steamer, the first is merely a flowery repetition of Sunak's foreign court line & equally dishonest, but no surprises there. The second is your tic making its daily return, another tour of Turbo's greatest hits, including Brexit, Rayner, captain flip flop & the single market. Do you need a reboot?Thank goodness for Brexit. No Party is offering to try rejoining, certainly not Labour and SKS who has also ruled out any SM CU nonsense. However this is Capt FlipFlop so we'll have to wait and see what Rayner wants.
More from Lord Ashcroft on Starmer not winning hearts and minds (that's a phrase from The Guardian not Lord A), and the influence of polls in terms of a type of positive feedback.
Lord Ashcroft polling said:
Most people think they know what will happen. Keir Starmer not becoming prime minister on Friday morning would make the shocks of 2016 (Brexit, Trump, Leicester City winning the Premier League) look tame.
Less clear is the scale of the likely Conservative defeat. More than half of voters now expect a large Labour majority, according to my latest polling – up from just over a third in the days after Rishi’s surprise announcement in the Downing Street drizzle. Most of those who expect such a result say this is because of the polls and predictions they see in the news, and it is true that many studies point to varying degrees of Labour landslide. But as a wise man once said, it’s hard to make predictions, especially about the future.
A huge Labour victory is certainly one scenario, but there are others. My poll found that only half the country say they have definitely made up their minds how to vote. In my focus groups around the country, the lack of enthusiasm for Keir Starmer and Labour is unmistakeable.
Less clear is the scale of the likely Conservative defeat. More than half of voters now expect a large Labour majority, according to my latest polling – up from just over a third in the days after Rishi’s surprise announcement in the Downing Street drizzle. Most of those who expect such a result say this is because of the polls and predictions they see in the news, and it is true that many studies point to varying degrees of Labour landslide. But as a wise man once said, it’s hard to make predictions, especially about the future.
A huge Labour victory is certainly one scenario, but there are others. My poll found that only half the country say they have definitely made up their minds how to vote. In my focus groups around the country, the lack of enthusiasm for Keir Starmer and Labour is unmistakeable.
isaldiri said:
You were the one who decided to have a swipe at Pannick due to his school history implying that he was obviously incorrect on potential application of human rights law despite his background as a pretty bloody highly regarded lawyer that has dealt with quite a lot of high profile human rights cases…..
Given he's taken an interest in defending the public school system since at least 1982, he is not a disinterested party just doing it for the pay and my comment wasn't inaccurate. He's a lawyer offering an opinion and if it gets to court other lawyers will offer theirs.turbobloke said:
President Merkin said:
turbobloke said:
Clearly meddlesome interference is still possibe arising from unelected non-UK supranational bloat.
Thank goodness for Brexit. No Party is offering to try rejoining, certainly not Labour and SKS who has also ruled out any SM CU nonsense. However this is Capt FlipFlop so we'll have to wait and see what Rayner wants.
Picking the two diamonds out of that steamer, the first is merely a flowery repetition of Sunak's foreign court line & equally dishonest, but no surprises there. The second is your tic making its daily return, another tour of Turbo's greatest hits, including Brexit, Rayner, captain flip flop & the single market. Do you need a reboot?Thank goodness for Brexit. No Party is offering to try rejoining, certainly not Labour and SKS who has also ruled out any SM CU nonsense. However this is Capt FlipFlop so we'll have to wait and see what Rayner wants.
More from Lord Ashcroft on Starmer not winning hearts and minds (that's a phrase from The Guardian not Lord A), and the influence of polls in terms of a type of positive feedback.
Lord Ashcroft polling said:
Most people think they know what will happen. Keir Starmer not becoming prime minister on Friday morning would make the shocks of 2016 (Brexit, Trump, Leicester City winning the Premier League) look tame.
Less clear is the scale of the likely Conservative defeat. More than half of voters now expect a large Labour majority, according to my latest polling – up from just over a third in the days after Rishi’s surprise announcement in the Downing Street drizzle. Most of those who expect such a result say this is because of the polls and predictions they see in the news, and it is true that many studies point to varying degrees of Labour landslide. But as a wise man once said, it’s hard to make predictions, especially about the future.
A huge Labour victory is certainly one scenario, but there are others. My poll found that only half the country say they have definitely made up their minds how to vote. In my focus groups around the country, the lack of enthusiasm for Keir Starmer and Labour is unmistakeable.
Less clear is the scale of the likely Conservative defeat. More than half of voters now expect a large Labour majority, according to my latest polling – up from just over a third in the days after Rishi’s surprise announcement in the Downing Street drizzle. Most of those who expect such a result say this is because of the polls and predictions they see in the news, and it is true that many studies point to varying degrees of Labour landslide. But as a wise man once said, it’s hard to make predictions, especially about the future.
A huge Labour victory is certainly one scenario, but there are others. My poll found that only half the country say they have definitely made up their minds how to vote. In my focus groups around the country, the lack of enthusiasm for Keir Starmer and Labour is unmistakeable.
turbobloke said:
From its creation to the end of 2023, the ECHR made over 300 judgments with at least one violation of an ECHR right against the UK. The position post-brexit has been much better, i,e, interference has been at a lower level, and whlle the UK will follow the Supreme Court, the EHCR can still have an impact. EHCR rule 39 orders aka interim measures aka urgent incjunctions are a case in point. Just such an emission led to prevention of the first deportation flight to Rwanda back in 2022. This delayed implementation until the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill received Royal Assent in April this year, Clearly meddlesome interference is still possibe arising from unelected non-UK supranational bloat.
The quality of judges and the method of their appointment has been a matter of concern in the UK prior to brexit and in other Council of Europe Member States. Judges are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe based on three nominations from each Member State. Both the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe identified numerous weaknesses in this method. Moving with the customary speed of light these deficiencies haven't been fullly rectified with the reform process ongoing, Some are 'underway'.
Thank goodness for Brexit. No Party is offering to try rejoining, certainly not Labour and SKS who has also ruled out any SM CU nonsense. However this is Capt FlipFlop so we'll have to wait and see what Rayner wants.
Will be interesting to see if the human rights lawyer will implement the rulings of the ECHR. I forgot about votes for prisoners - good to see the British government is ignoring judicial overreach. The quality of judges and the method of their appointment has been a matter of concern in the UK prior to brexit and in other Council of Europe Member States. Judges are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe based on three nominations from each Member State. Both the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe identified numerous weaknesses in this method. Moving with the customary speed of light these deficiencies haven't been fullly rectified with the reform process ongoing, Some are 'underway'.
Thank goodness for Brexit. No Party is offering to try rejoining, certainly not Labour and SKS who has also ruled out any SM CU nonsense. However this is Capt FlipFlop so we'll have to wait and see what Rayner wants.
Just a few days out from the GE and yet no sign, no hear for weeks from the Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy. And where the heck is the Green energy secretary Ed Milliband.
Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
crankedup5 said:
Just a few days out from the GE and yet no sign, no hear for weeks from the Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy. And where the heck is the Green energy secretary Ed Milliband.
Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
In the case of Miliband because they don't want the public to get the slightest inkling of the costs of net zero in energy production by 2030. Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
As is often the case in elections these days the media carefully avoid talking about the issues that matter.
crankedup5 said:
Just a few days out from the GE and yet no sign, no hear for weeks from the Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy. And where the heck is the Green energy secretary Ed Milliband.
Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
Why would they? Thjey don't need to do anything apart from watch the Conservatives tear themselves apart, and Reform administer a kicking to their twitching corpse.Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
All they need to do is 'carry the vase' until polling day.
Given the Sunday Times has thrown it's weight behind Labour (albeit it with several caveats) it would be a monumental shock if we didn't have a Labour government later this week then we'll know for sure if they will be an utter disaster or just carrying on with more Titanic deckchair shuffling.
crankedup5 said:
Just a few days out from the GE and yet no sign, no hear for weeks from the Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy. And where the heck is the Green energy secretary Ed Milliband.
Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
They have kept Lammy out of the way since he suggested that trans women could grow a cervix a couple of years ago and that campaigners for women's rights were dinosaurs. Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
Vanden Saab said:
crankedup5 said:
Just a few days out from the GE and yet no sign, no hear for weeks from the Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy. And where the heck is the Green energy secretary Ed Milliband.
Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
They have kept Lammy out of the way since he suggested that trans women could grow a cervix a couple of years ago and that campaigners for women's rights were dinosaurs. Both Offices of National importance and yet Labour choose to hide them both away for the duration of their electoral campaign. Why would they do that?
https://x.com/alexharmstrong/status/18067532363026...
BigMon said:
Why would they? Thjey don't need to do anything apart from watch the Conservatives tear themselves apart, and Reform administer a kicking to their twitching corpse.
All they need to do is 'carry the vase' until polling day.
Given the Sunday Times has thrown it's weight behind Labour (albeit it with several caveats) it would be a monumental shock if we didn't have a Labour government later this week then we'll know for sure if they will be an utter disaster or just carrying on with more Titanic deckchair shuffling.
One might hope that they have something to say on foreign policy given it's particularly important at the moment.All they need to do is 'carry the vase' until polling day.
Given the Sunday Times has thrown it's weight behind Labour (albeit it with several caveats) it would be a monumental shock if we didn't have a Labour government later this week then we'll know for sure if they will be an utter disaster or just carrying on with more Titanic deckchair shuffling.
S600BSB said:
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Must say it's weird seeing the people who quite literally didn't give a fk about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.
It's actually pathetic.
It’s actually hilarious!k about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.It's actually pathetic.
Ascayman said:
S600BSB said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Must say it's weird seeing the people who quite literally didn't give a fk about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.
It's actually pathetic.
It’s actually hilarious!k about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.It's actually pathetic.
Ascayman said:
S600BSB said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Must say it's weird seeing the people who quite literally didn't give a fk about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.
It's actually pathetic.
It’s actually hilarious!k about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.It's actually pathetic.
hidetheelephants said:
Ascayman said:
S600BSB said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Must say it's weird seeing the people who quite literally didn't give a fk about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.
It's actually pathetic.
It’s actually hilarious!k about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.It's actually pathetic.
borcy said:
I doubt they'd risk it, there's little upside in talking foreign policy pre election but potential downsides.
Which is part of why we are in a mess - the press would rather comment on the polls and wonder how many seats the Conservatives will lose or who comes up with ideas for Ed Davey's stunts than try to get the likely next government to have a serious conversation about what they plan to do when in office and Labour would rather the electorate put them in government without really knowing what that means (something which will come back to bite them, but that's tomorrow's problem so no need to think about it today).Ascayman said:
So kids both private and state being disadvantaged are just collateral damage so you can laugh at the ‘pear clutchers’ whatever or whoever they are?
Of course it does and always has been so. The end justifies the means, it sticks 2 fingers up at all the nasty rich posh people so just too bad for everyone else affected…..Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff