Topic: Doesn't matter who you vote for as long as it's for the right reasons!

[Andy @ Allerton!]

And from the Gruniad ; Johnson and Gove lying again;


 07:24

Speaking of Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Michael Gove, it looks like he is up front and centre today in the UK government’s media operation to justify the way they have handled the delay to lifting restrictions in England.

On Sky News, asked by presenter Kay Burley about the Labour claim that the UK government “should have moved at lightning speed” to close the borders with India, as was done with Pakistan and Bangladesh, and that the delay was caused by Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson’s desire for a “trade deal photo op”, Gove denied this.

    It’s not true. No. We closed our borders, we put India on the “red list”, at the earliest, appropriate opportunity on the basis of all the evidence that we had. In fact we put India on the “red list” before we knew that this Delta variant was a variant of concern.

It is worth noting that on 9 April Pakistan had a seven-day average of 21 cases per million people, Bangladesh had twice as many and India had four times as many. Pakistan and Bangladesh were put on the red list at that point. India was not added until 23 April, after Johnson’s planned trip to India was cancelled on 19 April.

[Wild Romany Boy]

Saying that, the questions are best left to the shadow health minister and they are holding the Tories to account;




UK opposition health spokesperson, Jonathan Ashworth, Labour’s shadow health secretary, has told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the reason why the nation was in the current situation was because the Government had not imposed travel restrictions sooner.

“Rather than red listing this variant, we essentially gave it the red carpet treatment as 20,000 people were allowed to arrive from India over a number of weeks in April, even though the warning signs were there,” he said. “That essentially seeded this Delta variant across the country.”

“Nobody wanted to be in this place and we could have avoided this if it was not for the Delta variant, and I’m afraid this is on Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson for his puny weak border policy, which was secure as a sieve.”

PA report he added that Labour would “collapse” the traffic light travel system, adding: “Essentially all those nations on the amber list we wouldn’t move to a red list. We would want to see more nations move on to the green list when it is safe to do so.

“But we would ask those returning from those red list countries to properly quarantine themselves at the borders - I understand this is an immense inconvenience for people, and I don’t want to put people in this situation, but we’ve got to protect ourselves from this very dangerous virus.”

So, which is it? No criticism because it would look like sniping or justifiable criticism because it doesn't look like sniping?

If it's justifiable criticism then Snail was right. Either way, she certainly didn't say keeping restrictions wasn't the right decision.

[Welshred]

Andy, Snail isn't saying that it isn't the right thing to do - she might believe that, but she's not saying it - she is saying that it presents an opportunity for Starmer because it didn't have to be this way. And Starmer gave a very good answer on LBC around this issue - I don't think he should do shows like that, but he was excellent for that question in particular - explaining that it was the right thing to do but it didn't have to be. He can make hay with that line of thought.

She's also been very fair to Starmer despite having different ideas of policy.

He even said back in February that failure to secure our borders jeopardising our fight against Covid but no one is going to pick back up on that

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1359928244162744325?s=20

I don't think she has been fair to Starmer though as she's never given him a chance

So, which is it? No criticism because it would look like sniping or justifiable criticism because it doesn't look like sniping?

If it's justifiable criticism then Snail was right. Either way, she certainly didn't say keeping restrictions wasn't the right decision.

Is she right though? On the day the restrictions were announced Labour held the government to account by releasing statements on Twitter by through the deputy leader, Starmer retweeted Ashworth's comments in the Commons on allowing the Delta variant to reach Britain and right now the Shadow Home Secretary is holding a speech to say the Tories failed to protect our borders and how Labour would have done better.

This is why I've asked, what do people actually want them to do to "hold the government to account"?

[Welshred]

https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1404720858644500483?s=20

"The Johnson Variant"

Paul Waugh
@paulwaugh
·
3m
Shadow home secretary
@NickTorfaen
 says Tory govt to blame for Freedom Day delay.
“They have allowed the Delta variant, first identified in India to take hold here. Let’s call it what it is. Let’s put the blame where it should lie.
“In this country – it’s the Johnson Variant."

[Nobby Reserve]

Will take bet on equivalent turnout to 2019. The Whitechapel Centre is my choice, name your's and we'll put a small bit to one of them. It does spectacularly miss the point of how FPTP works though, doesn't it? And especially how Labour's vote stacks in certain wards and constituencies and the whole point of Starmer needing to move the party to addressing different audiences. I'd be very confident Starmer will win seats back next election. It's how many which'll be key. No heroic victories in defeat though, just next stage of moving towards winning even more seats which is what matters.

I'll accept your charity, too.     Just a bit of fun and the charity benefits either way.

I'll PM you.

The number of seats question is interesting. In 2019 Labour increased their vote in safer Tory seats, whilst losing votes in most of their 'traditional' seats. A number of factors led to that, but the one definite is that the efficiency of Labour's vote plummeted (it had been decreasing since I think around 2005). Saw a great table a few weeks ago that showed this, but can't for the life of me find it now to post.

Starmer simply isn't attracting back lost Labour 'working class' votes. And he's alienated the left. He's falling between two stools. He's missing as many open goals as Corbyn did. And even when his shadow cabinet do pipe up with something, it gains no traction because a) the print media have become even more partisan right-wing and barely report any Labour statements (unless they can use them to whip-up the Brexwit cretins); and b) the BBC news editorial is becoming similarly partisan and little more than a propaganda mouthpiece for the Tory Party.

It's incredibly worrying, as foundations of our democracy (which already had major flaws) have been removed, leaving a subverted process that is drifting rapidly towards an Orwellian nightmare.

[Zeb]

I'll accept your charity, too.     Just a bit of fun and the charity benefits either way.

I'll PM you.

The number of seats question is interesting. In 2019 Labour increased their vote in safer Tory seats, whilst losing votes in most of their 'traditional' seats. A number of factors led to that, but the one definite is that the efficiency of Labour's vote plummeted (it had been decreasing since I think around 2005). Saw a great table a few weeks ago that showed this, but can't for the life of me find it now to post.

Starmer simply isn't attracting back lost Labour 'working class' votes. And he's alienated the left. He's falling between two stools. He's missing as many open goals as Corbyn did. And even when his shadow cabinet do pipe up with something, it gains no traction because a) the print media have become even more partisan right-wing and barely report any Labour statements (unless they can use them to whip-up the Brexwit cretins); and b) the BBC news editorial is becoming similarly partisan and little more than a propaganda mouthpiece for the Tory Party.

It's incredibly worrying, as foundations of our democracy (which already had major flaws) have been removed, leaving a subverted process that is drifting rapidly towards an Orwellian nightmare.

I think one thing we've always differed on is the idea of what is meant by 'the left' even in the terms of Labour's factions. If it's defined by the hard left who'll vote TUSC and SWP and whatever then it's not really going to be a problem because it's a tiny, tiny fragment of the electorate even if tens of thousands of people meant by it, and it's arguably a precondition of winning elections. But I suspect there's a bit overreach going on in wanting to claim the entirety of the liberal Red-Green segment of the electorate too, which is bold after 2019 just from the Green side of it.

Next big opportunity for Starmer to make a good impression will be in the General Election campaign when he can try to set the headlines for a day. If he can continue to shape the perception of the party in the more positive way he has done, which is measurably improved, and can take the opportunity then the fundamentals are pretty encouraging for some gains. There's a real memory hole around just how bad Corbyn was. Nandy's there today speaking to foreign policy around the world, knowing she's the full backing of the leader to condemn China's abuse of its minorities, while Thornberry had to wait for the tankies and trots in the Leader's Office to fight it out over whether Russia invading part of Ukraine was a bad thing or not. Tiny changes, to quote Frightened Rabbit.

(And, as said, in PMs just for some fun. )

[killer-heels]

I have been working from home for a few days and I have decided to watch GB News from time to time and its even shitter than it promised to be. Andrew Neil went on about not creating an echo chamber and then went and created an echo chamber.

Its Talkradio but the TV version.

[TepidT2O]

I have been working from home for a few days and I have decided to watch GB News from time to time and its even shitter than it promised to be. Andrew Neil went on about not creating an echo chamber and then went and created an echo chamber.

Its Talkradio but the TV version.

Which was always the intention I suspect…

It’s just a different kind of echo chamber

[So… Howard Philips]

I have been working from home for a few days and I have decided to watch GB News from time to time and its even shitter than it promised to be. Andrew Neil went on about not creating an echo chamber and then went and created an echo chamber.

Its Talkradio but the TV version.

Saw five minutes of it yesterday - shite and not even shite enough to be funny.

[Welshred]

Yet they are boasting about how good their ratings have been and its probably because of people turning it on to see how shit it is, yet the numbers legitimise and strengthen their feeling of needing to do it. Wish no one tuned in.

[Snail]

Yet they are boasting about how good their ratings have been and its probably because of people turning it on to see how shit it is, yet the numbers legitimise and strengthen their feeling of needing to do it. Wish no one tuned in.

Yeah, I don’t think they care if people are watching it just to dunk on it, all they care about is ratings. Don’t give them the oxygen of publicity, good or bad.

[killer-heels]

Yet they are boasting about how good their ratings have been and its probably because of people turning it on to see how shit it is, yet the numbers legitimise and strengthen their feeling of needing to do it. Wish no one tuned in.

I wont be tuning in anymore and it was the odd glance at a few times.

Ultimately their thing will die a death as more people dont tune in, even those who that news is tailored towards.

[Cpt_Reina]

Barely anyone watches terrestrial TV when there's something worth watching on it. Never mind a very niche very tucked away news channel.

GB News won't be around long, not worth worrying about.

[Nobby Reserve]

I have been working from home for a few days and I have decided to watch GB News from time to time and its even shitter than it promised to be. Andrew Neil went on about not creating an echo chamber and then went and created an echo chamber.

Its Talkradio but the TV version.

Not seen it, won't ever tuned in.

I did chuckle to read it's already being dubbed 'GBeebies'

[killer-heels]

Barely anyone watches terrestrial TV when there's something worth watching on it. Never mind a very niche very tucked away news channel.

GB News won't be around long, not worth worrying about.

Yep, they will be gone soon.

[Zeb]

May be of interest to a few others. Tim Bale's summary of the big 'official' history of the 2019 election which'll come out later this year. It's a bunch of academics who typically get access to internal party data as well as interviews with those involved and then try to make sense of it all.

Spoiler

All this stood in complete contrast to Labour’s seriously dysfunctional, largely in-house campaign. It suffered from a lack of strategic direction and organisational coordination, from acrimonious personal and political arguments between advisors, and from a refusal among some of those involved to accept internal research that suggested the need for a more defensive targeting strategy. Their refusal stemmed from both their left-populist ideological instincts and their (unfounded) belief that a similarly defensive approach, rather than helping to hold on to marginals that would otherwise have been lost, had somehow denied the party a well-deserved win at the 2017 election. Unsurprisingly, none of this – nor the fact that its IT systems had problems – helped Labour leverage what might have been one of the party’s strengths, its larger grassroots membership, although, truth to tell, the fact that so many Labour members live in London and Southern England, rather than those areas of the country where a more effective »ground game« might have made a difference, was always going to be an issue.

...The 2019 general election left Labour a long, long way behind. Indeed, it might have finished even further behind had a few more Leave voters in seats it managed to keep hold of not plumped for the Brexit Party rather than the Conservatives. Given Nigel Frottage’s departure from politics, this is not likely to be an option available to those voters next time round, which could be worth between ten and twenty additional seats for the Conservatives. The Conservatives are also likely to be the main beneficiaries of the forthcoming parliamentary boundary review aimed at equalising the size of constituencies. Consequently, barring a severe economic downturn, or a highly-negative retrospective verdict on Johnson’s handling of the pandemic, or else a messy break-up of the UK occasioned by a vote for Scottish independence, it is very difficult to imagine Labour – even if it fights a far better campaign than it did in 2019 – winning in 2023 or 2024.

For now, however, the 2019 contest should serve as yet another reminder to Europe’s centre-left parties that they cannot afford to ignore culturally conservative voters, nor those voters who, while they are hardly rich, do not consider themselves as poor, even if they worry about the quality of life and prospects of the smaller, often post-industrial towns in which they live. Centre-left parties also need to avoid putting too much faith in their larger memberships: grassroots activists simply cannot compensate for the lack of an agreed, evidence-driven, electoral and targeting strategy and a campaign team with the authority, freedom and financial resources to execute it.

[close]

http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/london/18014.pdf

[TepidT2O]

Barely anyone watches terrestrial TV when there's something worth watching on it. Never mind a very niche very tucked away news channel.

GB News won't be around long, not worth worrying about.

My policy is to totally ignore it…..

Any outrage (as there is for talk radio) will only fan the oxygen of its existence.

[Lusty]

My policy is to totally ignore it…..

Any outrage (as there is for talk radio) will only fan the oxygen of its existence.

Their whole business model is going to based on getting someone to say something outrageous that gets clipped and goes viral.  90% of the people who do their marketing for them are going to be the people who disagree with them and are too dumb to realise.

[Jshooters]

Their whole business model is going to based on getting someone to say something outrageous that gets clipped and goes viral.  90% of the people who do their marketing for them are going to be the people who disagree with them and are too dumb to realise.

AKA The Stu Brennan method

[TheShanklyGates]

Their whole business model is going to based on getting someone to say something outrageous that gets clipped and goes viral.  90% of the people who do their marketing for them are going to be the people who disagree with them and are too dumb to realise.

Yep. Low broadcast ratings won't bother them that much if the professionally outraged are ensuring they have huge social media reach.

[Commie Bobbie]

Yep, they will be gone soon.

If they accelerate their beloved 'war on woke' then they've done their job in their crackpotted eyes.

c*nts.

[Lusty]

AKA The Stu Brennan method

Haha yeah exactly. I would have no idea who he was if it wasn't for outraged Liverpool fans retweeting him!

[TSC]

GB news off to a flyer


https://gript.ie/multiple-companies-pull-advertisements-from-gb-news/

[jillcwhomever]

I thought this was a good article from the Independent, and gives food for thought as to how much worse things could get.

In the end, there will be an appalling price paid for the war on the BBC http://a.msn.com/01/en-gb/AAL4xJ7?ocid=st

[Yorkykopite]

I thought this was a good article from the Independent, and gives food for thought as to how much worse things could get.

In the end, there will be an appalling price paid for the war on the BBC http://a.msn.com/01/en-gb/AAL4xJ7?ocid=st

The first mainstream politician to introduce this shit into Britain was Alex Salmond during the Scottish referendum, with his daily invitation to his supporters to vent their hatred of the BBC at every press conference. Then we saw mobs following Jim Murphy around the streets of Glasgow howling into his face from all of three inches when he tried to speak. We got relatively sensible people defending it too, because it was politically convenient to them (I'm thinking of Muriel Grey, but there were others).

Since then the viciousness has escalated. I tip my hat to Nicola Sturgeon who obviously has not followed the Salmond populist path in Scotland. Now it is very much an English problem. Those thugs ganging up on the BBC reporter in the streets of London are Brownshirts in the making, just like Salmond's mob were. 

[jillcwhomever]

The first mainstream politician to introduce this shit into Britain was Alex Salmond during the Scottish referendum, with his daily invitation to his supporters to vent their hatred of the BBC at every press conference. Then we saw mobs following Jim Murphy around the streets of Glasgow howling into his face from all of three inches when he tried to speak. We got relatively sensible people defending it too, because it was politically convenient to them (I'm thinking of Muriel Grey, but there were others).

Since then the viciousness has escalated. I tip my hat to Nicola Sturgeon who obviously has not followed the Salmond populist path in Scotland. Now it is very much an English problem. Those thugs ganging up on the BBC reporter in the streets of London are Brownshirts in the making, just like Salmond's mob were.

The other concern is the Government putting pro-Tories into the top-level management of the BBC in order to control it, its something that everyone should be making a fuss about but only a couple of papers have ever highlighted it, to my knowledge. There is little doubt what the Government is trying to do and its scary how few people are making any kind of protest about it.

[Lusty]

GB news off to a flyer


https://gript.ie/multiple-companies-pull-advertisements-from-gb-news/

On a similar note to the posts above, how many people do you think have just found out that GB News exists after reading about this? Plays into their cancel culture narrative quite nicely.

Not saying the advertisers were wrong to pull out, just interesting that this might actually be a positive for them.

[killer-heels]

On a similar note to the posts above, how many people do you think have just found out that GB News exists after reading about this? Plays into their cancel culture narrative quite nicely.

Not saying the advertisers were wrong to pull out, just interesting that this might actually be a positive for them.

They have promoted their channel on nearly every media outlet I think.

[rob1966]

They have promoted their channel on nearly every media outlet I think.

I've heard ads for it on Planet Rock, which is part of planet radio, so that's all the magic, absolute, Kiss stations as well as loads of local stations carrying the ad.

[TSC]

On a similar note to the posts above, how many people do you think have just found out that GB News exists after reading about this? Plays into their cancel culture narrative quite nicely.

Not saying the advertisers were wrong to pull out, just interesting that this might actually be a positive for them.

Doubt many know about it.  I heard the report about it on LBC radio today so googled it.  But then I doubt many folk are even aware of the existence of GB news.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I thought this was a good article from the Independent, and gives food for thought as to how much worse things could get.

In the end, there will be an appalling price paid for the war on the BBC http://a.msn.com/01/en-gb/AAL4xJ7?ocid=st

Well that crowd didn't look like a total shower of nutters.

Some real weirdos out there.

[KillieRed]

The first mainstream politician to introduce this shit into Britain was Alex Salmond during the Scottish referendum, with his daily invitation to his supporters to vent their hatred of the BBC at every press conference. Then we saw mobs following Jim Murphy around the streets of Glasgow howling into his face from all of three inches when he tried to speak. We got relatively sensible people defending it too, because it was politically convenient to them (I'm thinking of Muriel Grey, but there were others).

Since then the viciousness has escalated. I tip my hat to Nicola Sturgeon who obviously has not followed the Salmond populist path in Scotland. Now it is very much an English problem. Those thugs ganging up on the BBC reporter in the streets of London are Brownshirts in the making, just like Salmond's mob were.

I’m pretty sure Muriel Gray, though on friendly terms with NS is a pro-union Labour supporter (at least in 2014).

[Wild Romany Boy]

5 years to the day that Jo Cox was murdered.

What a horrible day that was, with the aura of it still ominously present to this day.

May she rest in peace.

[Yorkykopite]

I’m pretty sure Muriel Gray, though on friendly terms with NS is a pro-union Labour supporter (at least in 2014).

Did it I get that wrong Killie? Apologies to Muriel. The comment I remember was that Murphy deserved what he got and should have known better than to address public meetings in Glasgow because it was an "independence town." It came from someone with a credible reputation, I remember that.

[Elmo!]

Did it I get that wrong Killie? Apologies to Muriel. The comment I remember was that Murphy deserved what he got and should have known better than to address public meetings in Glasgow because it was an "independence town." It came from someone with a credible reputation, I remember that.

Murphy wasn't really addressing people. He was turning up and shouting at people and people shouted back. I don't think he has a right to complain about that.

He shouln't have been egged though to be fair.

[Yorkykopite]

Murphy wasn't really addressing people. He was turning up and shouting at people and people shouted back. I don't think he has a right to complain about that.

I think he was. Probably he does too. But, you may be correct in saying that was the justification given by the mob that shouted him down. One bloke was shouting at Murphy at the top of his voice from a very short distance. In fact their noses were touching. The incident with Nicolas Watt the other day was reminiscent of this.

If you accept that people you disagree with have no right to election hustings then I think you must also say that your own side can be shouted down too. That spells the end of democratic debate.

Until the Scottish referendum happened Britain had been mercifully free of this kind of intimidation. Eggs were sometimes thrown, punches too, so were flour bombs. But on the whole the principle was observed that during an election it was acceptable - even desirable - for politicians and campaigners to take to the streets to make their case. The last time organised disruption of public meetings happened was during the First World War when pacifists and anti-war campaigners were repeatedly set on and their meetings broken up.

It's a bad road to go down. 

[Elmo!]

I think he was. Probably he does too. But, you may be correct in saying that was the justification given by the mob that shouted him down. One bloke was shouting at Murphy at the top of his voice from a very short distance. In fact their noses were touching. The incident with Nicolas Watt the other day was reminiscent of this.

If you accept that people you disagree with have no right to election hustings then I think you must also say that your own side can be shouted down too. That spells the end of democratic debate.

Until the Scottish referendum happened Britain had been mercifully free of this kind of intimidation. Eggs were sometimes thrown, punches too, so were flour bombs. But on the whole the principle was observed that during an election it was acceptable - even desirable - for politicians and campaigners to take to the streets to make their case. The last time organised disruption of public meetings happened was during the First World War when pacifists and anti-war campaigners were repeatedly set on and their meetings broken up.

It's a bad road to go down.

They weren't hustings - he was turning up out of nowhere (with an entourage of supportters) on high streets and standing on a crate and shouting aggressively at everyone through a megaphone.

That siad, the guy you are talking about - Sean Clerkin - is an absolute twat and I would want absolutely nothing to do with him - as does the vast majority of the indy movement. He is shunned by it.

[Sangria]

I think he was. Probably he does too. But, you may be correct in saying that was the justification given by the mob that shouted him down. One bloke was shouting at Murphy at the top of his voice from a very short distance. In fact their noses were touching. The incident with Nicolas Watt the other day was reminiscent of this.

If you accept that people you disagree with have no right to election hustings then I think you must also say that your own side can be shouted down too. That spells the end of democratic debate.

Until the Scottish referendum happened Britain had been mercifully free of this kind of intimidation. Eggs were sometimes thrown, punches too, so were flour bombs. But on the whole the principle was observed that during an election it was acceptable - even desirable - for politicians and campaigners to take to the streets to make their case. The last time organised disruption of public meetings happened was during the First World War when pacifists and anti-war campaigners were repeatedly set on and their meetings broken up.

It's a bad road to go down. 

One of the most admirable political campaigns I have ever seen was when John Major stood on a soapbox and engaged contrary voters in debate, and people who hated the Tories yelled at him, yet he continued on. Whatever else he did, that for me was democracy at its finest. One of a small number of Tory politicians whom I hold above most Labour politicians.

[Wild Romany Boy]

One of the most admirable political campaigns I have ever seen was when John Major stood on a soapbox and engaged contrary voters in debate, and people who hated the Tories yelled at him, yet he continued on. Whatever else he did, that for me was democracy at its finest. One of a small number of Tory politicians whom I hold above most Labour politicians.

I know Major's reputation has improved immensely since leaving office, but 'most Labour politicians'?

He is still a guy that generally voted against gay rights, for example. There are many things I disagree with him politically, views on minimum wage for example, but that's the a deal breaker for me.

[Dr. Beaker]

I know Major's reputation has improved immensely since leaving office, but 'most Labour politicians'?

He is still a guy that generally voted against gay rights, for example. There are many things I disagree with him politically, views on minimum wage for example, but that's the a deal breaker for me.

Preaching Victorian values whilst porking Edwina Curry.