FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Budget '23 - Starmer's robotic response
Budget '23 - Starmer's robotic response
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us? "At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response "I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Cheshire you have been strangely quiet on the forums lately? A few threads would have been good to get your involvement." Hello 
Just been busy with work. I have dipped in and out, but had the afternoon off today. Not for the budget, but as it was on, I caught the middle and end of it and Starmer's response, hence the post. I'll review the posts you might be referring to | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well. "The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs ". ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked"Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either ". ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was ) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked"In fairness to anyone asked a question at PMQs or anywhere else, the answers aren't always as simple as the questions. That goes for anything really. The problem we have is anything that is said can be and is weaponised so unfortunately people skirt around questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either . ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was ) "Bless them, the Tory MPs do tend to get ‘boisterous’ when they are over excited, just like a bunch of children on a school trip | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs "In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11% | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either . ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was )
Bless them, the Tory MPs do tend to get ‘boisterous’ when they are over excited, just like a bunch of children on a school trip "It's theatre and you know Labour are just as bad. Angrier Rayner must have shouted 'absolutely' as many times as Starmer said 'sticking plaster politics'! Not shown on the ten o’clock news are the moments of consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition when talking about issues of national importance such as the Ukraine war, security threats and covid. All of these issues are dealt with in a way that we would expect grown adults to speak to each other: calmly, in a professional manner and politely
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"perhaps SKS should have left Rachel Reeves to respond to the Chancellor's budget? " Yes, she couldn't have done any worse and has a good banking background | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either . ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was )
Bless them, the Tory MPs do tend to get ‘boisterous’ when they are over excited, just like a bunch of children on a school trip
It's theatre and you know Labour are just as bad. Angrier Rayner must have shouted 'absolutely' as many times as Starmer said 'sticking plaster politics'!
Not shown on the ten o’clock news are the moments of consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition when talking about issues of national importance such as the Ukraine war, security threats and covid. All of these issues are dealt with in a way that we would expect grown adults to speak to each other: calmly, in a professional manner and politely
"The vast majority of Tory MPs are men, the majority of labour MPs are women, men are more likely to act like children when in a ‘gang’ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11% "The poll of polls put labour 20 points ahead | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either . ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was )
Bless them, the Tory MPs do tend to get ‘boisterous’ when they are over excited, just like a bunch of children on a school trip
It's theatre and you know Labour are just as bad. Angrier Rayner must have shouted 'absolutely' as many times as Starmer said 'sticking plaster politics'!
Not shown on the ten o’clock news are the moments of consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition when talking about issues of national importance such as the Ukraine war, security threats and covid. All of these issues are dealt with in a way that we would expect grown adults to speak to each other: calmly, in a professional manner and politely
The vast majority of Tory MPs are men, the majority of labour MPs are women, men are more likely to act like children when in a ‘gang’ "Really? What is the evidence for this? Sounds like a sweeping generalisation to me, which is unlike you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11% "This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it. The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11% "The only poll that matters is the General Election. However, there are plenty of others that have Labour around 50% and Conservatives around 25%. It could just be a “mid term” dip. We’ll see. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain. "It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! ". ;, ,, the tories were making the same claim , telling us they could do better than the party who had been in power for the last 13 years | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! . ;, ,, the tories were making the same claim , telling us they could do better than the party who had been in power for the last 13 years"You mean in 2010? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! "Captain Hindsight and Angrier Rayner? Genuinely? Are you a CCHQ plant? And people wonder why the country is increasingly riven.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! "Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words. Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either . ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was )
Bless them, the Tory MPs do tend to get ‘boisterous’ when they are over excited, just like a bunch of children on a school trip
It's theatre and you know Labour are just as bad. Angrier Rayner must have shouted 'absolutely' as many times as Starmer said 'sticking plaster politics'!
Not shown on the ten o’clock news are the moments of consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition when talking about issues of national importance such as the Ukraine war, security threats and covid. All of these issues are dealt with in a way that we would expect grown adults to speak to each other: calmly, in a professional manner and politely
The vast majority of Tory MPs are men, the majority of labour MPs are women, men are more likely to act like children when in a ‘gang’
Really? What is the evidence for this? Sounds like a sweeping generalisation to me, which is unlike you "I can assure you the majority of Tory MPs are men and the majority of labour MPs are women . I can also assure you that women are better ‘behaved’ when in a group than men | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Captain Hindsight and Angrier Rayner? Genuinely? Are you a CCHQ plant? And people wonder why the country is increasingly riven...."You know they have lost the argument when they resort to childish name calling | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
The only poll that matters is the General Election.
However, there are plenty of others that have Labour around 50% and Conservatives around 25%. It could just be a “mid term” dip. We’ll see."I agree, the polls can be misleading, let’s wait until the May elections | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool. "I still can't agree with you. Another shitshow of a budget that won't help any normal working person. They will be gone at the next GE | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
I still can't agree with you. Another shitshow of a budget that won't help any normal working person.
They will be gone at the next GE
"Obviously I hope you're right. But this fella is what I have in mind when I talk about the power the Tory PR machine and the press have over the electorate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
I still can't agree with you. Another shitshow of a budget that won't help any normal working person.
They will be gone at the next GE
Obviously I hope you're right. But this fella is what I have in mind when I talk about the power the Tory PR machine and the press have over the electorate. "We can only hope he's in a minority. Your always gonna see people on both sides shouting loud. The rational tend to stay fairly quiet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us? "was the budget that bad a pre emptive anti labour thread was needed? Good news folks ... You can put 60k pa into an iht free plan. If you have 60k going spare each year. (That's all I've seen so far !) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Captain Hindsight and Angrier Rayner? Genuinely? Are you a CCHQ plant? And people wonder why the country is increasingly riven...."So I have to be a Labour supporter just so the country is not 'riven'? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool. "Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either . ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was )
Bless them, the Tory MPs do tend to get ‘boisterous’ when they are over excited, just like a bunch of children on a school trip
It's theatre and you know Labour are just as bad. Angrier Rayner must have shouted 'absolutely' as many times as Starmer said 'sticking plaster politics'!
Not shown on the ten o’clock news are the moments of consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition when talking about issues of national importance such as the Ukraine war, security threats and covid. All of these issues are dealt with in a way that we would expect grown adults to speak to each other: calmly, in a professional manner and politely
The vast majority of Tory MPs are men, the majority of labour MPs are women, men are more likely to act like children when in a ‘gang’
Really? What is the evidence for this? Sounds like a sweeping generalisation to me, which is unlike you
I can assure you the majority of Tory MPs are men and the majority of labour MPs are women . I can also assure you that women are better ‘behaved’ when in a group than men "How can you 'assure' me that women are better ‘behaved’ when in a group than men? It's subjective. Some hen parties can be riotous! It's factual Labour has more women MPs than male MPs. I don't need to be assured by that. It would just help if their leader could define a woman | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Captain Hindsight and Angrier Rayner? Genuinely? Are you a CCHQ plant? And people wonder why the country is increasingly riven....
You know they have lost the argument when they resort to childish name calling "You seem to have forgotten about the 'childish name calling' you've engaged in over Boris and Brexit threads. They're all there | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs . ,,, ,,, ,,, in fairness to Sunak , he does answer questions at PMQs , but unfortunately , not the one he has been asked
Ah yes, that’s true, but I suppose no one cares about that either . ,,, ,,, although last week after Sunak had talked about energy the Speaker pointed out to Tory MPs they were making so much noise Sunak was unable to hear the questions being put to him adding he thought the question was about housing (which it was )
Bless them, the Tory MPs do tend to get ‘boisterous’ when they are over excited, just like a bunch of children on a school trip
It's theatre and you know Labour are just as bad. Angrier Rayner must have shouted 'absolutely' as many times as Starmer said 'sticking plaster politics'!
Not shown on the ten o’clock news are the moments of consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition when talking about issues of national importance such as the Ukraine war, security threats and covid. All of these issues are dealt with in a way that we would expect grown adults to speak to each other: calmly, in a professional manner and politely
The vast majority of Tory MPs are men, the majority of labour MPs are women, men are more likely to act like children when in a ‘gang’
Really? What is the evidence for this? Sounds like a sweeping generalisation to me, which is unlike you
I can assure you the majority of Tory MPs are men and the majority of labour MPs are women . I can also assure you that women are better ‘behaved’ when in a group than men
How can you 'assure' me that women are better ‘behaved’ when in a group than men? It's subjective. Some hen parties can be riotous!
It's factual Labour has more women MPs than male MPs. I don't need to be assured by that. It would just help if their leader could define a woman "Go to a woman’s sports event, go to a men’s sports event . SKS knows what a woman is , he was just doing what all politicians do (apparently) by not answering the question (watch PMQs today for an example ) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
I still can't agree with you. Another shitshow of a budget that won't help any normal working person.
They will be gone at the next GE
Obviously I hope you're right. But this fella is what I have in mind when I talk about the power the Tory PR machine and the press have over the electorate.
We can only hope he's in a minority. Your always gonna see people on both sides shouting loud. The rational tend to stay fairly quiet."Why is it irrational to post on a politics forum? You do, frequently. Is it just certain views you don't find rational? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Captain Hindsight and Angrier Rayner? Genuinely? Are you a CCHQ plant? And people wonder why the country is increasingly riven....
You know they have lost the argument when they resort to childish name calling
You seem to have forgotten about the 'childish name calling' you've engaged in over Boris and Brexit threads. They're all there "Nice try, but wrong again, Angrier Rayner?? You’re better than that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans? "‘Friends’ of mine are stating that the child care measure are shite, can you remind me when they will be introduced | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us? was the budget that bad a pre emptive anti labour thread was needed?
Good news folks ... You can put 60k pa into an iht free plan. If you have 60k going spare each year.
(That's all I've seen so far !)"The budget response was bad, not the budget
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans? "The national association responsible for the provision of nurseries claim the existing system and its lack of adequate funding rates is why 5500 nurseries have closed in the last year alone. So if it’s more of the same it’s pointless as the rate isn’t enough. Now add to that the lack of workers available or even interested and the underlying infrastructure leads industry insiders to say it’s just words on top of words with no real plan. For context the rate is under £5 an hour support and I think the ratio is one worker to four children. So £20 per hour for worker, building , heating, rates, food, nappies consumables etc etc. it’s not great is it. I have no further insight this is just repeated from a radio discussion this morning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans? "My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous. I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us? was the budget that bad a pre emptive anti labour thread was needed?
Good news folks ... You can put 60k pa into an iht free plan. If you have 60k going spare each year.
(That's all I've seen so far !)
The budget response was bad, not the budget
"I agree with your OP, nobody cares about SKS response | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
‘Friends’ of mine are stating that the child care measure are shite, can you remind me when they will be introduced "Next year. They can't be reading them fully or properly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant. "And they don’t get introduced until April 2024 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
‘Friends’ of mine are stating that the child care measure are shite, can you remind me when they will be introduced
Next year.
They can't be reading them fully or properly "April 2024? Why the delay? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant. "Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
‘Friends’ of mine are stating that the child care measure are shite, can you remind me when they will be introduced
Next year.
They can't be reading them fully or properly
April 2024? Why the delay? "Proper planning | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country. "Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
‘Friends’ of mine are stating that the child care measure are shite, can you remind me when they will be introduced
Next year.
They can't be reading them fully or properly
April 2024? Why the delay?
Proper planning "Proper gaslighting | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
I still can't agree with you. Another shitshow of a budget that won't help any normal working person.
They will be gone at the next GE
Obviously I hope you're right. But this fella is what I have in mind when I talk about the power the Tory PR machine and the press have over the electorate.
We can only hope he's in a minority. Your always gonna see people on both sides shouting loud. The rational tend to stay fairly quiet.
Why is it irrational to post on a politics forum? You do, frequently. Is it just certain views you don't find rational?
"I didn't say it was irrational to post in a politics forum, where did you get that from. In wider society most rational people keep their thoughts to themselves and quietly tick a box at the polling station. Opposite ends of the spectrum are always the loudest to shout. Tell me its opinion if you look but most of us know that statement to be true. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country. ""What about Labour" is just "what about something else which isn't what we're currently talking about", you may as well post "what about the variety of deodorant available in North Korea". I am not of the opinion that Labour will win the next election. Your posts are part of my reasoning why. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win "I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press."Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election "I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
‘Friends’ of mine are stating that the child care measure are shite, can you remind me when they will be introduced
Next year.
They can't be reading them fully or properly
April 2024? Why the delay?
Proper planning "on order to get more people back into jobs, we need more people to do jobs. 
Hello more immigration! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election
I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people.
"True, but he can’t possibly be as bad as the current shower of shite,  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Captain Hindsight and Angrier Rayner? Genuinely? Are you a CCHQ plant? And people wonder why the country is increasingly riven....
So I have to be a Labour supporter just so the country is not 'riven'? "That's what you picked up from my post? And Tories say education is bad now..... Support whomsoever as you want, but discussing personalities rather than policies won't help society find policies that 'work'. Unless of course the policy you support is simply 'not this person' but you wouldn't be so vapid would you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! . ;, ,, the tories were making the same claim , telling us they could do better than the party who had been in power for the last 13 years
You mean in 2010? ". ,,, ,,, ,,, no I mean the party who has been in power for the last 13 years , Sunak's pitch to the tory Party in order to become leader was look at what a mess we are in I can sort it out ,, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant. "Good Morning Britain viewers are finding it great news. Rachel Reeves for Labour has welcomed it and says Labour will continue the policy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! . ;, ,, the tories were making the same claim , telling us they could do better than the party who had been in power for the last 13 years
You mean in 2010? . ,,, ,,, ,,, no I mean the party who has been in power for the last 13 years , Sunak's pitch to the tory Party in order to become leader was look at what a mess we are in I can sort it out ,, "What's the problem with trying to continually improve? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
"What about Labour" is just "what about something else which isn't what we're currently talking about", you may as well post "what about the variety of deodorant available in North Korea".
I am not of the opinion that Labour will win the next election. Your posts are part of my reasoning why. "We are talking about Labour's response to the budget? They are, as far as I am aware, fielding candidates in every constituency in the UK. I'm not aware that Korean deodorant cans are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Good Morning Britain viewers are finding it great news.
Rachel Reeves for Labour has welcomed it and says Labour will continue the policy "Huh! What's this got to do with anything? I am genuinely curious how this is in anyway related to the budget or related to the OP where you demonstrated the power of the Tory PR machine and the right wing press? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election
I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people.
True, but he can’t possibly be as bad as the current shower of shite, "Childish language | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election
I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people.
True, but he can’t possibly be as bad as the current shower of shite,
Childish language "Nonetheless accurate.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election
I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people.
True, but he can’t possibly be as bad as the current shower of shite,
Childish language "Stop being a snowflake | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us? "Cheshire, you didn’t write all of this did you? There’s some cut n pasting going you right? Some of this is not your usual syntax? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election
I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people.
True, but he can’t possibly be as bad as the current shower of shite,
Childish language
Nonetheless accurate.."So is Captain Hindsight | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election
I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people.
True, but he can’t possibly be as bad as the current shower of shite,
Childish language
Stop being a snowflake "Behaviour breeds behaviour | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
Cheshire, you didn’t write all of this did you? There’s some cut n pasting going you right? Some of this is not your usual syntax?"Of course I did
Don't you agree Starmer was poor? Considering how dreadful he was at PMQs, I thought he was saving his best for the budget. Instead it was the usual 'sticking plaster' jibe - just faux, clip-on outrage.
With a fair wind, the economy will be in great shape come the GE and the Tories will get re-elected. If Keir and his cohorts get in, the socialists will get to crash it again like in 2010.
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Good Morning Britain viewers are finding it great news.
Rachel Reeves for Labour has welcomed it and says Labour will continue the policy
Huh! What's this got to do with anything?
I am genuinely curious how this is in anyway related to the budget or related to the OP where you demonstrated the power of the Tory PR machine and the right wing press?"On the tremendous new childcare measures you said 'My friends think it's crap'. That's not relatable to the OP either. But it is to do with the budget. Much more relevant than Korean deodorant cans | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us? "Well the opposition party’s get a copy of the budget statement 2hrs before it is read, so with PMQ’s just before that it basically gives opposition parties 60 minutes to write a response to a huge document…. Responses are never going to be brilliant | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Good Morning Britain viewers are finding it great news.
Rachel Reeves for Labour has welcomed it and says Labour will continue the policy
Huh! What's this got to do with anything?
I am genuinely curious how this is in anyway related to the budget or related to the OP where you demonstrated the power of the Tory PR machine and the right wing press?
On the tremendous new childcare measures you said 'My friends think it's crap'. That's not relatable to the OP either. But it is to do with the budget. Much more relevant than Korean deodorant cans "I suppose nobody cares about SKS response to the budget | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Why are they irrelevant? Most people on here are convinced Labour will be in power next year. Next year! What are their plans? It is inadequate to sing 'things can only get better' all over again. They did for a short while after the 97 landslide and then Labour bankrupted the country.
Oppositions don’t win elections , Governments lose elections, all labour have to be is slightly less shit than the Tories and they will win
I disagree. In order for Labour to win they would have to convince billionaires and big corporations that they would serve their needs better than the Tories. When they do that they will get the donations, funding, and support from the right wing press.
Maybe, I think SKS is doing that , however , I still believe that a government who is doing a good job (the tories obviously aren’t) won’t lose an election
I agree SKS is moving that way. And why personally I find it pointless voting for him. Sure they will be less corrupt, but they won't be governing in the interests of British people.
True, but he can’t possibly be as bad as the current shower of shite,
Childish language
Nonetheless accurate..
So is Captain Hindsight "So childish language is good, or not good? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
Why is the budget 'useless'? Friends of mine are heralding the childcare measures already. Do you not agree with extra help here? Or with the energy price cap extension? What are Labour's plans?
My friends think it's crap. Childcare measures are poor and not helping those in need enough. The energy price cap is ridiculous.
I'm not going to bother with your "what about Labour" posts anymore. They're utterly irrelevant.
Good Morning Britain viewers are finding it great news.
Rachel Reeves for Labour has welcomed it and says Labour will continue the policy
Huh! What's this got to do with anything?
I am genuinely curious how this is in anyway related to the budget or related to the OP where you demonstrated the power of the Tory PR machine and the right wing press?
On the tremendous new childcare measures you said 'My friends think it's crap'. That's not relatable to the OP either. But it is to do with the budget. Much more relevant than Korean deodorant cans "Excellent. The wider point here is that you are typical of a large portion of the electorate. Lapping up the distraction, and the "what about something else" that has been such an effective tactic for the Tories and the press. The more you post, the more I am convinced that there is zero hope for any positive change in this country in the short or medium term. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
Cheshire, you didn’t write all of this did you? There’s some cut n pasting going you right? Some of this is not your usual syntax?
Of course I did
Don't you agree Starmer was poor? Considering how dreadful he was at PMQs, I thought he was saving his best for the budget. Instead it was the usual 'sticking plaster' jibe - just faux, clip-on outrage.
With a fair wind, the economy will be in great shape come the GE and the Tories will get re-elected. If Keir and his cohorts get in, the socialists will get to crash it again like in 2010.
"We don’t need Socialists to crash the economy (for avoidance of doubt they didn’t in 2008-10 either) as the Conservatives have been doing very well all on their own! Just ask Truss and Kwartang  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
Cheshire, you didn’t write all of this did you? There’s some cut n pasting going you right? Some of this is not your usual syntax?
Of course I did
Don't you agree Starmer was poor? Considering how dreadful he was at PMQs, I thought he was saving his best for the budget. Instead it was the usual 'sticking plaster' jibe - just faux, clip-on outrage.
With a fair wind, the economy will be in great shape come the GE and the Tories will get re-elected. If Keir and his cohorts get in, the socialists will get to crash it again like in 2010.
We don’t need Socialists to crash the economy (for avoidance of doubt they didn’t in 2008-10 either) as the Conservatives have been doing very well all on their own! Just ask Truss and Kwartang "I blame those pesky ‘socialist ‘ bankers for the bankers crash | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
Cheshire, you didn’t write all of this did you? There’s some cut n pasting going you right? Some of this is not your usual syntax?
Of course I did
Don't you agree Starmer was poor? Considering how dreadful he was at PMQs, I thought he was saving his best for the budget. Instead it was the usual 'sticking plaster' jibe - just faux, clip-on outrage.
With a fair wind, the economy will be in great shape come the GE and the Tories will get re-elected. If Keir and his cohorts get in, the socialists will get to crash it again like in 2010.
We don’t need Socialists to crash the economy (for avoidance of doubt they didn’t in 2008-10 either) as the Conservatives have been doing very well all on their own! Just ask Truss and Kwartang
I blame those pesky ‘socialist ‘ bankers for the bankers crash "One of the genuinely 'great' political campaigns of recent memory was by Cameron/Osborne to persuade people that banks offering 100% mortgages to risky customers was somehow irrelevant but that public sector pay vaguely keeping up with inflation was the death knell for the economy. And that's before we get onto all public sector spending being bad..... We're still paying the price for that now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
Cheshire, you didn’t write all of this did you? There’s some cut n pasting going you right? Some of this is not your usual syntax?
Of course I did
Don't you agree Starmer was poor? Considering how dreadful he was at PMQs, I thought he was saving his best for the budget. Instead it was the usual 'sticking plaster' jibe - just faux, clip-on outrage.
With a fair wind, the economy will be in great shape come the GE and the Tories will get re-elected. If Keir and his cohorts get in, the socialists will get to crash it again like in 2010.
We don’t need Socialists to crash the economy (for avoidance of doubt they didn’t in 2008-10 either) as the Conservatives have been doing very well all on their own! Just ask Truss and Kwartang
I blame those pesky ‘socialist ‘ bankers for the bankers crash
One of the genuinely 'great' political campaigns of recent memory was by Cameron/Osborne to persuade people that banks offering 100% mortgages to risky customers was somehow irrelevant but that public sector pay vaguely keeping up with inflation was the death knell for the economy. And that's before we get onto all public sector spending being bad.....
We're still paying the price for that now." totally agree | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives!
Everyone who doubted me when I said we are stuck with the Tories for the foreseeable future should take heed of this chaps words.
Reality is utterly irrelevant. The Tories know they will be voted in again despite what the polls tell us. This is an excellent example. The budget is released, it's useless, the focus is squarely places on someone else. "Look over there at this distraction" is a powerful tool.
I still can't agree with you. Another shitshow of a budget that won't help any normal working person.
They will be gone at the next GE
Obviously I hope you're right. But this fella is what I have in mind when I talk about the power the Tory PR machine and the press have over the electorate. "I hope so to. But, but, but... They seem to have a wonderful grasp on the old adage.. What people say and what people actually do are two totally separate things. Just look at FAB as an example. Everyone is going to meet up and have fun, oh dear!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well. "The quality of the opposition? Very poor. Plan? They haven't got one. Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights. Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless. And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE."I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?"When is Amy having a party?
Our friends from Spain have already said that they think the Conservatives are/have been 'politically inept'?
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
When is Amy having a party?
Our friends from Spain have already said that they think the Conservatives are/have been 'politically inept'?
"Bloody tiny iphone keyboard lolz | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
When is Amy having a party?
Our friends from Spain have already said that they think the Conservatives are/have been 'politically inept'?
Bloody tiny iphone keyboard lolz"Or fat fingers?
Or a bit of both, you being centrists and all | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The polls aren’t narrowing, you were correct the first time, no one cares much about Starmers response, just like no one cares much about Sunaks refusals to answer on PMQs
In January, Labour enjoyed its largest lead of 21 points over the Tories. Concerns over Starmer's U-turns on his pledges, combined with landmark legislation on immigration, the new Brexit deal laid down by Rishi Sunak and a rebounding economy have led to a marked closing of the gap. A Savanta poll one week ago, puts the Labour lead down to 11%
This is what I've been saying for a long while and have been slated for it.
The Tory PR machine and supporting press are all powerful, and will ensure five more years of Tory rule for Britain.
It's to be hoped so, because all we got from Captain Hindsight today was that Labour would simply and magically do everything better! He closed by bizarrely telling the House that the country needed ‘change, stability and success’, but what he needed was a bit more time to work out what to actually coherently say, rather than attacking the perceived performance of the government in general and putting 'change' and 'stability' in the same sentence as objectives! . ;, ,, the tories were making the same claim , telling us they could do better than the party who had been in power for the last 13 years
You mean in 2010? . ,,, ,,, ,,, no I mean the party who has been in power for the last 13 years , Sunak's pitch to the tory Party in order to become leader was look at what a mess we are in I can sort it out ,,
What's the problem with trying to continually improve? ". ,,, ,,, where is this continual improvement of which you speak ???? ;,, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
When is Amy having a party?
Our friends from Spain have already said that they think the Conservatives are/have been 'politically inept'?
Bloody tiny iphone keyboard lolz
Or fat fingers?
Or a bit of both, you being centrists and all "Hey you’ve never actually seen my fingers! Slm I tell you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?"I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite. However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward. Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded."Genuinely interested, in what way are the current Tories Labour-lite? What policies do the Tories have that, in an ideal world Labour would keep? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded."They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc "Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair. You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch. I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving."And that is why they (labour) were booted out in 2010 and why the tories will lose the next GE | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
And that is why they (labour) were booted out in 2010 and why the tories will lose the next GE "We actually agree on something
BFF? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
And that is why they (labour) were booted out in 2010 and why the tories will lose the next GE
We actually agree on something
BFF?"Yep, labour don’t have to be ‘great’ or even good, they just have to be slightly less shit than the Tories | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving."The Winter of Discontent? How far back are we going to seek understanding of the present? WW1 started under a Liberal government, does that bear on the Lib Dems today? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
The Winter of Discontent? How far back are we going to seek understanding of the present? WW1 started under a Liberal government, does that bear on the Lib Dems today?
"I only went back to the one before last, it's not my fault Labour aren't in Government very often. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
And that is why they (labour) were booted out in 2010 and why the tories will lose the next GE
We actually agree on something
BFF?
Yep, labour don’t have to be ‘great’ or even good, they just have to be slightly less shit than the Tories "They will also need to be "slightly less shit" than the SNP....and take a couple of dozen Scottish seats. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
The Winter of Discontent? How far back are we going to seek understanding of the present? WW1 started under a Liberal government, does that bear on the Lib Dems today?
I only went back to the one before last, it's not my fault Labour aren't in Government very often."Yep, 40 years ago is a perfect predictor. Drawing inference from events that were in a very different time (UK median age is 40 y.o) perhaps contributes to less frequent changes on government. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
The Winter of Discontent? How far back are we going to seek understanding of the present? WW1 started under a Liberal government, does that bear on the Lib Dems today?
I only went back to the one before last, it's not my fault Labour aren't in Government very often.
Yep, 40 years ago is a perfect predictor.
Drawing inference from events that were in a very different time (UK median age is 40 y.o) perhaps contributes to less frequent changes on government."40 years is all we have to help. As I said, not my fault they aren't in Government very often. I also only mentioned it because it was strikes during Labour Governement. Are you one of those who want to throw everything at the Tories but refuse to believe Labour aren't also self-serving? If you really want to we can just talk about the very last time they were in Government. Or would you also argue that time isn't an indicator either because that was nearly 15 years ago? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
The Winter of Discontent? How far back are we going to seek understanding of the present? WW1 started under a Liberal government, does that bear on the Lib Dems today?
I only went back to the one before last, it's not my fault Labour aren't in Government very often.
Yep, 40 years ago is a perfect predictor.
Drawing inference from events that were in a very different time (UK median age is 40 y.o) perhaps contributes to less frequent changes on government.
40 years is all we have to help. As I said, not my fault they aren't in Government very often.
I also only mentioned it because it was strikes during Labour Governement.
Are you one of those who want to throw everything at the Tories but refuse to believe Labour aren't also self-serving?
If you really want to we can just talk about the very last time they were in Government. Or would you also argue that time isn't an indicator either because that was nearly 15 years ago?"It's not really any help at all though is it? The world is a very different place, the actors and the approach have changed. You may as well say 'X football club were shit in 1979, ergo they are shit now'. It's irrelevant unless you can demonstrate causation rather than correlation. And there are more strike days per year this year than since 1989 - so perhaps it's more accurate to say striking is a more recent Tory issue? What do you mean self-serving? All parties are self-serving, that's the point of them. They illustrate through their manifesto their view of what a 'good life' or 'good society' looks like and we then choose to support it or not. When elected delivery of that good life/society is the goal. If you can make what Labour did up until 2010 relevant to what they will do now then yes, it's material, if the link is just the name of the party then it's not really relevant. For instance, in 1987 unilateral nuclear disarmament was a Labour policy. It isn't now. Is it material to current Labour defence policy? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
The Winter of Discontent? How far back are we going to seek understanding of the present? WW1 started under a Liberal government, does that bear on the Lib Dems today?
I only went back to the one before last, it's not my fault Labour aren't in Government very often.
Yep, 40 years ago is a perfect predictor.
Drawing inference from events that were in a very different time (UK median age is 40 y.o) perhaps contributes to less frequent changes on government.
40 years is all we have to help. As I said, not my fault they aren't in Government very often.
I also only mentioned it because it was strikes during Labour Governement.
Are you one of those who want to throw everything at the Tories but refuse to believe Labour aren't also self-serving?
If you really want to we can just talk about the very last time they were in Government. Or would you also argue that time isn't an indicator either because that was nearly 15 years ago?
It's not really any help at all though is it? The world is a very different place, the actors and the approach have changed. You may as well say 'X football club were shit in 1979, ergo they are shit now'. It's irrelevant unless you can demonstrate causation rather than correlation.
And there are more strike days per year this year than since 1989 - so perhaps it's more accurate to say striking is a more recent Tory issue?
What do you mean self-serving? All parties are self-serving, that's the point of them. They illustrate through their manifesto their view of what a 'good life' or 'good society' looks like and we then choose to support it or not. When elected delivery of that good life/society is the goal.
If you can make what Labour did up until 2010 relevant to what they will do now then yes, it's material, if the link is just the name of the party then it's not really relevant. For instance, in 1987 unilateral nuclear disarmament was a Labour policy. It isn't now. Is it material to current Labour defence policy? "Got ya. Don't ever compare one Government to another. Unless of course you're comparing the Tories of today with any other Tories. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
At the end of the day no one cares much about the leader of the opposition’s response
I agree with you, but that doesn't mean people don't care at all. Although the polls are narrowing, people are aware of the potential for a Labour victory and want to see what the quality of the opposition is like, what their plan is and how agile they might be when events, dear boy, events happen. The wooden, robotic response of Starmer does not bode well.
The quality of the opposition? Very poor.
Plan? They haven't got one.
Reaction to events? Rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Aware of the potential of a Labour victory? I would replace aware with scared shitless.
And for once I will blame the Conservative party for being so politically inept that the more than useless Labour party will probably win the next GE.
I have no particular loyalty to amy party. But do you really honestly think the Conservative Govt have done a good job? If so then do you think for the whole time since 2010? Since 2016? Since 2019? Since 2022 (twice)?
I certainly don't think the Conservative party have done a good job this time. They have pretty much morphed into Labour lite.
However I still think they would be the be.... no sorry, least worst party going forward.
Anyone who thinks that Labour will be any better is seriously deluded.
They can’t be any worse, look at the economy, strikes, living standards, Brexit fuckup, corruption etc etc
Oh come on, the economy got fucked under Brown, living standards fucking fell out the arse, the winter of discontent strikes, the corruption in expenses scandal, Tony Blair.
You'll say some of this was out of their control but the fact remains that it happened under Labour's watch.
I'll likely back Starmer next time round but don't kid yourself that it's only the Tories who are self serving.
The Winter of Discontent? How far back are we going to seek understanding of the present? WW1 started under a Liberal government, does that bear on the Lib Dems today?
I only went back to the one before last, it's not my fault Labour aren't in Government very often.
Yep, 40 years ago is a perfect predictor.
Drawing inference from events that were in a very different time (UK median age is 40 y.o) perhaps contributes to less frequent changes on government.
40 years is all we have to help. As I said, not my fault they aren't in Government very often.
I also only mentioned it because it was strikes during Labour Governement.
Are you one of those who want to throw everything at the Tories but refuse to believe Labour aren't also self-serving?
If you really want to we can just talk about the very last time they were in Government. Or would you also argue that time isn't an indicator either because that was nearly 15 years ago?
It's not really any help at all though is it? The world is a very different place, the actors and the approach have changed. You may as well say 'X football club were shit in 1979, ergo they are shit now'. It's irrelevant unless you can demonstrate causation rather than correlation.
And there are more strike days per year this year than since 1989 - so perhaps it's more accurate to say striking is a more recent Tory issue?
What do you mean self-serving? All parties are self-serving, that's the point of them. They illustrate through their manifesto their view of what a 'good life' or 'good society' looks like and we then choose to support it or not. When elected delivery of that good life/society is the goal.
If you can make what Labour did up until 2010 relevant to what they will do now then yes, it's material, if the link is just the name of the party then it's not really relevant. For instance, in 1987 unilateral nuclear disarmament was a Labour policy. It isn't now. Is it material to current Labour defence policy?
Got ya. Don't ever compare one Government to another. Unless of course you're comparing the Tories of today with any other Tories.
"I haven't compared this government to any other. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back."*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership. The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another."What Labour policies materially contributed to the global financial crisis? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
What Labour policies materially contributed to the global financial crisis?"Tony Blair admitted that they didn't fully understand the financial sector and in effect failed to regulate properly. That had a huge effect on the banks in this country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
What Labour policies materially contributed to the global financial crisis?
Tony Blair admitted that they didn't fully understand the financial sector and in effect failed to regulate properly.
That had a huge effect on the banks in this country. "Very possibly, yes. Accepting that proposition then the bank's themselves were still responsible for acting in ways that were risky (sub prime mortgages for instance). If Blair should have realised that banks were essentially taking the piss, shouldn't Johnson/Truss/Sunak have realised the energy companies are also taking the piss and have had the foresight to regulate them more strictly? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
What Labour policies materially contributed to the global financial crisis?
Tony Blair admitted that they didn't fully understand the financial sector and in effect failed to regulate properly.
That had a huge effect on the banks in this country.
Very possibly, yes. Accepting that proposition then the bank's themselves were still responsible for acting in ways that were risky (sub prime mortgages for instance).
If Blair should have realised that banks were essentially taking the piss, shouldn't Johnson/Truss/Sunak have realised the energy companies are also taking the piss and have had the foresight to regulate them more strictly?
"Of course the banks are responsible for taking the piss, they didn't care though, they were making money, same with the energy companies today. Absolutely the Tories should do something about the energy sector, they haven't. Hence, I said I'd likely back Starmer at the next GE. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another."No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period. What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history. Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period.
What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history.
Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies."Why have you said twice now that Labour did not fuck the economy? I've reiterated that I didn't say that already once, and clearly now having to do the same again. I really do wish people would read. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
What Labour policies materially contributed to the global financial crisis?
Tony Blair admitted that they didn't fully understand the financial sector and in effect failed to regulate properly.
That had a huge effect on the banks in this country.
Very possibly, yes. Accepting that proposition then the bank's themselves were still responsible for acting in ways that were risky (sub prime mortgages for instance).
If Blair should have realised that banks were essentially taking the piss, shouldn't Johnson/Truss/Sunak have realised the energy companies are also taking the piss and have had the foresight to regulate them more strictly?
Of course the banks are responsible for taking the piss, they didn't care though, they were making money, same with the energy companies today.
Absolutely the Tories should do something about the energy sector, they haven't. Hence, I said I'd likely back Starmer at the next GE."You need to look at who was responsible for the deregulation of the financial markets and banks. Labour’s fault was not overturning or pulling back from the level of deregulation that had been permitted. However, with the late 90s economic boom it would have been hard to convince the financial sector they needed tighter policing. Following the crash the UK and EU led the way in imposing tighter regulation. Guess who recently relaxed all the regulation in the UK? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period.
What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history.
Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies.
Why have you said twice now that Labour did not fuck the economy?
I've reiterated that I didn't say that already once, and clearly now having to do the same again.
I really do wish people would read."Yeah but I like to bang my drum loudly for the hard of understanding at the back (not you) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period.
What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history.
Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies.
Why have you said twice now that Labour did not fuck the economy?
I've reiterated that I didn't say that already once, and clearly now having to do the same again.
I really do wish people would read.
Yeah but I like to bang my drum loudly for the hard of understanding at the back (not you)"I should quote the other one but this is last so this'll do. I know who was responsible for the deregulation, that doesn't remove the fact that Labour allowed it to get to the level it did. I'm also aware of the recent relaxation too, another of the reason I'll likely back Starmer. I think my point in all of this is that Labour are no saints or saviours themselves judging on past results. A lot of people like to forget the bad shit that has happened under them. Less than the Tories? Most likely yes, but that doesn't absolve them from their own fuck ups. Actually forget I said all of that, apparently we're not allowed to look at Labour of old | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think we can agree that all governments have eventually become shit. But some are less shit than others. And some outstay their welcome or usefulness. " I'll agree with that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period.
What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history.
Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies.
Why have you said twice now that Labour did not fuck the economy?
I've reiterated that I didn't say that already once, and clearly now having to do the same again.
I really do wish people would read.
Yeah but I like to bang my drum loudly for the hard of understanding at the back (not you)
I should quote the other one but this is last so this'll do.
I know who was responsible for the deregulation, that doesn't remove the fact that Labour allowed it to get to the level it did.
I'm also aware of the recent relaxation too, another of the reason I'll likely back Starmer.
I think my point in all of this is that Labour are no saints or saviours themselves judging on past results. A lot of people like to forget the bad shit that has happened under them. Less than the Tories? Most likely yes, but that doesn't absolve them from their own fuck ups.
Actually forget I said all of that, apparently we're not allowed to look at Labour of old "If you're the same person now as you were 40 years ago, sure knock yourself out. If all you're going to do is describe events that happened when a particular government was in power with no analysis of policies of said government then I'm not sure that's as helpful as perhaps you do. British territory was invaded under the Conservatives, they're obviously shit at national security and we should be worried about another invasion now. Or maybe not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period.
What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history.
Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies."Can I have a point of order too? How are the events you mention exogenous? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period.
What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history.
Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies.
Can I have a point of order too?
How are the events you mention exogenous?
"Erm how are they not? Financial crisis in 2008 started with sub prime mortgages and securitisation in the USA that then unravelled the joined up global nature of our banking system. The Covid Pandemic originated from China. So...? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Point of order here for some of these tecent posts
Saying the economy was fucked by Brown total misses the exogenous impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Most of us normal every day folk actually have no concept of how utterly devastating and serious that was. Brown, for all his faults (cheap gold looking at you, pension raid looking at you too) actually took leadership across the G7 during that crisis and saved our bacon.
It would be the same with the Tories in terms of an exogenous event, ie the Covid Pandemic, except indicators leading up to there and the double whammy of Brexit plus £billion corruption under the smokescreen of handling the pandemic, has meant the UK couldn’t bounce back.
*economy got fucked under Brown/Labour leadership.
The circumstances were exogenous just as covid was. The point being made is that its not only the Tories that have fucked us in one way or another.
No! Labour did not fuck the economy. The unregulated US and UK banking sector fucked the economy. Brown (for all his faults) actually saved us from financial armageddon. But it came at a price. The whole “no money left” note trope misses the key point that governments have to borrow money if tax receipts are lower the govt spending. Tax receipts were lower because of the financial crash and knock on effect to western economies. It basically meant Gilts (govt bonds) would be more expensive for a period.
What Labour did not do during the exogenous event of the financial crash was ALSO impose Brexit causing a 4% permanent hit to GDP (ie lower tax receipts) or enable corruption on an unprecedented scale leading to the greatest transfer of public assets (our tax money) to the private sector and some well placed individuals in history.
Labour did all they could to save us from the exogenous event. The Johnson (then Truss) governments exploited the exogenous event for self enrichment for them and their cronies.
Can I have a point of order too?
How are the events you mention exogenous?
Erm how are they not?
Financial crisis in 2008 started with sub prime mortgages and securitisation in the USA that then unravelled the joined up global nature of our banking system.
The Covid Pandemic originated from China.
So...?"Because a stock market crash, run or crash in general is a known, models are known so that should be endogenous. The exogenous elements in a crash would be the number people willing to buy, the appetite for the purchase and cash available. I'm not sure that is any different for covid either, you mention the way things were manipulated to prosper individuals, if those models were unknown then we wouldn't know they had broken the rules. Demand drives price, endogenous. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Captain Hindsight in Stoke on Trent today was asked about his own pension affairs. He will reverse the Tory measure re the cap abolition and he would change his own 'special' treatment on his pension. He doesn't have to abide by the cap anyway! How nice of him
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today. "Stoke on Trent will be labour again at the next GE | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Captain Hindsight in Stoke on Trent today was asked about his own pension affairs. He will reverse the Tory measure re the cap abolition and he would change his own 'special' treatment on his pension. He doesn't have to abide by the cap anyway! How nice of him
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today. "as I understand it, the pension scheme he is in has no taxes relief on the way in, so therefore has no tax on the way out. More like a ISA than a pension in that respect. Good distraction tho. Did something happen yesterday ... ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my head, in my head.. He's living in my head.." Does that phrase come from a song? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my head, in my head.. He's living in my head.. Does that phrase come from a song?" Not sure, minded of Peter Gabriel.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my head, in my head.. He's living in my head.. Does that phrase come from a song? Not sure, minded of Peter Gabriel.." For some reason I'd got it to Zombie by The Cranberries! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my head, in my head.. He's living in my head.." "Does that phrase come from a song?" "Not sure, minded of Peter Gabriel.." I suddenly realised that I have an internet, and can just look for myself. Turns out it's not from a song, but it is Gen Z slang, which accounts for why the popularity of the phrase baffles me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my head, in my head.. He's living in my head.. Does that phrase come from a song? Not sure, minded of Peter Gabriel.. I suddenly realised that I have an internet, and can just look for myself. Turns out it's not from a song, but it is Gen Z slang, which accounts for why the popularity of the phrase baffles me." Had to Google Gen X, I'm well before then.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my head, in my head.. He's living in my head.. Does that phrase come from a song? Not sure, minded of Peter Gabriel.. For some reason I'd got it to Zombie by The Cranberries!" Similar yes, cracking song though.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Captain Hindsight in Stoke on Trent today was asked about his own pension affairs. He will reverse the Tory measure re the cap abolition and he would change his own 'special' treatment on his pension. He doesn't have to abide by the cap anyway! How nice of him
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today. "Does this special arrangement he has for his pension allow uncapped input into his pension fund, similar to what was announced in the budget for others? I believe it was quite standard practice for his old job but not sure if he was forced to take this form of pension fund or if he could have opted out of it ages ago | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us? "You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat. What's changed? The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response. The budget received the appropriate response. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Captain Hindsight in Stoke on Trent today was asked about his own pension affairs. He will reverse the Tory measure re the cap abolition and he would change his own 'special' treatment on his pension. He doesn't have to abide by the cap anyway! How nice of him
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today.
Does this special arrangement he has for his pension allow uncapped input into his pension fund, similar to what was announced in the budget for others? I believe it was quite standard practice for his old job but not sure if he was forced to take this form of pension fund or if he could have opted out of it ages ago"Why would he opt out of a legal pension? It's not even active avoidance. It's just the system as it stands. It would be like someone choosing to not take up the employers contribution to their workplace pension. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Capt Hindsight has a unique, bespoke pension deal from his time as DPP. He is opposing the Budget announcement to scrap the £1.07million lifetime tax-free allowance on pensions savings as a tax break for the very wealthy. Astonishingly, he enjoys a special “tax-unregistered” pension scheme which means conveniently the lifetime allowance does not apply to his contributions from his time as DPP between 2008 and 2013. In other words, taking everything he can get for himself whilst denying it to everyone else. Like I say, he is probably going to be the next PM and not because of any charisma or brilliant policies - it'll be years of him and his fellow hypocrites making a mess and then the Tories will have to repair it. The trouble with socialism is that it always runs out of other people's money. Nothing to see here.....Just do as he says, not as he does "There all the same. Dianne Abbott sends son private school (disaster) but socialist on surface. Labour all me life, but shameless hypocrits are not for working man right now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response."Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Captain Hindsight in Stoke on Trent today was asked about his own pension affairs. He will reverse the Tory measure re the cap abolition and he would change his own 'special' treatment on his pension. He doesn't have to abide by the cap anyway! How nice of him
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today.
Does this special arrangement he has for his pension allow uncapped input into his pension fund, similar to what was announced in the budget for others? I believe it was quite standard practice for his old job but not sure if he was forced to take this form of pension fund or if he could have opted out of it ages ago
Why would he opt out of a legal pension? It's not even active avoidance. It's just the system as it stands.
It would be like someone choosing to not take up the employers contribution to their workplace pension."Does that translate as yes he could have opted out of the scheme? I believe he has mentioned that when he is PM he will scrap such schemes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man "Starmer is not in the same league as Sunak, the latter is increasingly impressive
Starmer is however like all socialists a massive hypocrite. He's unlikely to think about you or the working class once he's elected, but meantime will say anything to get your vote. He ditched Corbyn and the working class, whose Brexit decision he detested and tried to delay/overturn, when he realised that failed miserably in Dec 2019 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Capt Hindsight has a unique, bespoke pension deal from his time as DPP. He is opposing the Budget announcement to scrap the £1.07million lifetime tax-free allowance on pensions savings as a tax break for the very wealthy. Astonishingly, he enjoys a special “tax-unregistered” pension scheme which means conveniently the lifetime allowance does not apply to his contributions from his time as DPP between 2008 and 2013. In other words, taking everything he can get for himself whilst denying it to everyone else. Like I say, he is probably going to be the next PM and not because of any charisma or brilliant policies - it'll be years of him and his fellow hypocrites making a mess and then the Tories will have to repair it. The trouble with socialism is that it always runs out of other people's money. Nothing to see here.....Just do as he says, not as he does "Because of the scheme’s status as “tax unregistered” [Starmer] also did not benefit from tax relief on contributions, nor were they entitled to take a 25pc tax-free lump sum as with other pensions. It's a generous pensions for sure. However it's different to the usual pensions you and I are in. It's more like an ISA than a pension on terms of tax treatment which is why such pensions are not included in the LTA calc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man "Dull is good in politics isn't it? Why would you want it to be exciting? I don't know what they will be for the lower paid from the other party's budget plans yet. Would provision of functioning public services, for instance, be acceptable or is that too dull? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Captain Hindsight in Stoke on Trent today was asked about his own pension affairs. He will reverse the Tory measure re the cap abolition and he would change his own 'special' treatment on his pension. He doesn't have to abide by the cap anyway! How nice of him
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today.
Does this special arrangement he has for his pension allow uncapped input into his pension fund, similar to what was announced in the budget for others? I believe it was quite standard practice for his old job but not sure if he was forced to take this form of pension fund or if he could have opted out of it ages ago
Why would he opt out of a legal pension? It's not even active avoidance. It's just the system as it stands.
It would be like someone choosing to not take up the employers contribution to their workplace pension.
Does that translate as yes he could have opted out of the scheme? I believe he has mentioned that when he is PM he will scrap such schemes."I do not know. Why would or should anyone opt out of an automatic Government defined scheme? He didn't go looking for it with an accountant... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man
Starmer is not in the same league as Sunak, the latter is increasingly impressive
Starmer is however like all socialists a massive hypocrite. He's unlikely to think about you or the working class once he's elected, but meantime will say anything to get your vote. He ditched Corbyn and the working class, whose Brexit decision he detested and tried to delay/overturn, when he realised that failed miserably in Dec 2019 "Sunak is certainly more competent than his predecessors. Impressive relative to them, perhaps. Corbyn, as you have stated many times, was unelectable so his policies had to be ditched to be elected. For a Conservative supporter I'm sure that the main opposition having unelectable policies would be ideal
As I recall Starmer wanted a Parliamentary vote on the results of the Brexit deal. The Brexit deal that your new hero has had to renegotiate again after your last hero had said that Brexit was done. There were also some unlawful activity around the proroguing of Parliament to avoid such scrutiny.
I guess that contempt of the Parliament that we apparently wanted more Sovereignty for was inconvenient. The same party that the current Prime Minister was Chief Secretary to the Treasury in and didn't object to?
Silly nicknames aren't helpful though, are they Pat? Everyone can agree on that, can't they? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer isn't a showman for sure. But is that what we want in a potential PM? Look where Boris's much-vaunted 'charisma' got us. To be fair, Starmer seems analytical and balanced in his decision making, and that's no bad thing." Starmer stood out until Sunak arrived. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer isn't a showman for sure. But is that what we want in a potential PM? Look where Boris's much-vaunted 'charisma' got us. To be fair, Starmer seems analytical and balanced in his decision making, and that's no bad thing. Starmer stood out until Sunak arrived. " Jeez that really isn’t saying much! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer isn't a showman for sure. But is that what we want in a potential PM? Look where Boris's much-vaunted 'charisma' got us. To be fair, Starmer seems analytical and balanced in his decision making, and that's no bad thing. Starmer stood out until Sunak arrived. Jeez that really isn’t saying much!" It says a an awful lot really and as long as Sunak or his minister don't screw up I expect to see Labour's poll advantage to erode over the next 12 months, especially as the conservative old guard were buried on the NI protocol. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer isn't a showman for sure. But is that what we want in a potential PM? Look where Boris's much-vaunted 'charisma' got us. To be fair, Starmer seems analytical and balanced in his decision making, and that's no bad thing. Starmer stood out until Sunak arrived. Jeez that really isn’t saying much! It says a an awful lot really and as long as Sunak or his minister don't screw up I expect to see Labour's poll advantage to erode over the next 12 months, especially as the conservative old guard were buried on the NI protocol. " Could well be the case but if the Erg etc decide that the reforms lot are more aligned to their way of thinking that will split the vote.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer isn't a showman for sure. But is that what we want in a potential PM? Look where Boris's much-vaunted 'charisma' got us. To be fair, Starmer seems analytical and balanced in his decision making, and that's no bad thing. Starmer stood out until Sunak arrived. Jeez that really isn’t saying much! It says a an awful lot really and as long as Sunak or his minister don't screw up I expect to see Labour's poll advantage to erode over the next 12 months, especially as the conservative old guard were buried on the NI protocol. " No my point was that Sunak is not exactly dripping with charisma so saying he is better than Starmer is not saying much. But yes, Sunak IS an improvement over Johnson and Truss | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer isn't a showman for sure. But is that what we want in a potential PM? Look where Boris's much-vaunted 'charisma' got us. To be fair, Starmer seems analytical and balanced in his decision making, and that's no bad thing. Starmer stood out until Sunak arrived. Jeez that really isn’t saying much! It says a an awful lot really and as long as Sunak or his minister don't screw up I expect to see Labour's poll advantage to erode over the next 12 months, especially as the conservative old guard were buried on the NI protocol. No my point was that Sunak is not exactly dripping with charisma so saying he is better than Starmer is not saying much. But yes, Sunak IS an improvement over Johnson and Truss " As was the lettuce over the latter.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer isn't a showman for sure. But is that what we want in a potential PM? Look where Boris's much-vaunted 'charisma' got us. To be fair, Starmer seems analytical and balanced in his decision making, and that's no bad thing. Starmer stood out until Sunak arrived. Jeez that really isn’t saying much! It says a an awful lot really and as long as Sunak or his minister don't screw up I expect to see Labour's poll advantage to erode over the next 12 months, especially as the conservative old guard were buried on the NI protocol. No my point was that Sunak is not exactly dripping with charisma so saying he is better than Starmer is not saying much. But yes, Sunak IS an improvement over Johnson and Truss As was the lettuce over the latter.. "We’ve gone past the perishable goods now, Sunak is clear of being likened to veg | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man
Dull is good in politics isn't it? Why would you want it to be exciting?
I don't know what they will be for the lower paid from the other party's budget plans yet.
Would provision of functioning public services, for instance, be acceptable or is that too dull?"Yeah I guess but labour of old had some characters - who can forget prescot connecting with the voter in ryhl lol Not greatest fan of blair but he seems he had charisma | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Captain Hindsight in Stoke on Trent today was asked about his own pension affairs. He will reverse the Tory measure re the cap abolition and he would change his own 'special' treatment on his pension. He doesn't have to abide by the cap anyway! How nice of him
To think this guy is about to be PM. Releasing his own tax details later. It's just what the people of Stoke on Trent wanted to hear today.
Does this special arrangement he has for his pension allow uncapped input into his pension fund, similar to what was announced in the budget for others? I believe it was quite standard practice for his old job but not sure if he was forced to take this form of pension fund or if he could have opted out of it ages ago
Why would he opt out of a legal pension? It's not even active avoidance. It's just the system as it stands.
It would be like someone choosing to not take up the employers contribution to their workplace pension.
Does that translate as yes he could have opted out of the scheme? I believe he has mentioned that when he is PM he will scrap such schemes.
I do not know. Why would or should anyone opt out of an automatic Government defined scheme? He didn't go looking for it with an accountant..."I was not asking if he should or should not join the scheme.I was asking a specific question where the answer is either yes or no. If you don't know as you say then fair enough. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man
Starmer is not in the same league as Sunak, the latter is increasingly impressive
Starmer is however like all socialists a massive hypocrite. He's unlikely to think about you or the working class once he's elected, but meantime will say anything to get your vote. He ditched Corbyn and the working class, whose Brexit decision he detested and tried to delay/overturn, when he realised that failed miserably in Dec 2019 "Utter tosh from you as usual | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man
Starmer is not in the same league as Sunak, the latter is increasingly impressive
Starmer is however like all socialists a massive hypocrite. He's unlikely to think about you or the working class once he's elected, but meantime will say anything to get your vote. He ditched Corbyn and the working class, whose Brexit decision he detested and tried to delay/overturn, when he realised that failed miserably in Dec 2019
Utter tosh from you as usual "Eh? A lot I know will agree with exactly this. Like Abbott sends son to private school, but is against them! Labour politicians are the worst hypocrits around. Blair , Brown, Harman , Thornbury and many on green benches. All very very rich and pretending to look after the poor. They are just lining there pockets. Labour we are all equal but some are more equal than others! And yes, Corbyn gone with any hope of on side of the working people. And yes, starter did try stop brexit. Hows any of this tosh? Are you lefty by any chance? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man
Starmer is not in the same league as Sunak, the latter is increasingly impressive
Starmer is however like all socialists a massive hypocrite. He's unlikely to think about you or the working class once he's elected, but meantime will say anything to get your vote. He ditched Corbyn and the working class, whose Brexit decision he detested and tried to delay/overturn, when he realised that failed miserably in Dec 2019
Utter tosh from you as usual
Eh? A lot I know will agree with exactly this. Like Abbott sends son to private school, but is against them!
Labour politicians are the worst hypocrits around. Blair , Brown, Harman , Thornbury and many on green benches. All very very rich and pretending to look after the poor. They are just lining there pockets.
Labour we are all equal but some are more equal than others! And yes, Corbyn gone with any hope of on side of the working people. And yes, starter did try stop brexit. Hows any of this tosh? Are you lefty by any chance? "Do you have to be poor to be able to help the poor? Do you have to avoid becoming rich in order to help the poor? Has anything they have done to warn money harmed the poor? Sweeping generalisations are easy to make but difficult to justify when asked to. Corbyn was not electable as Prime Minister, whatever his policies. You achieve nothing at all of you are not in power, do you? How did Starmer try to "stop" Brexit? By wanting Parliamentary debate and vote on the deal? Wasn't recovering Parliamentary sovereignty one of the reasons for Brexit? Did we get a good deal? If so, why has it just been renegotiated, again? Why did Starmer do something wrong if Boris Johnson is the one who illegally prorogued Parliament to prevent a democratic debate? I wouldn't describe it as "tosh" I would describe it as assertions without evidence. Empty sound bites. Give them some substance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man
Starmer is not in the same league as Sunak, the latter is increasingly impressive
Starmer is however like all socialists a massive hypocrite. He's unlikely to think about you or the working class once he's elected, but meantime will say anything to get your vote. He ditched Corbyn and the working class, whose Brexit decision he detested and tried to delay/overturn, when he realised that failed miserably in Dec 2019
Utter tosh from you as usual
Eh? A lot I know will agree with exactly this. Like Abbott sends son to private school, but is against them!
Labour politicians are the worst hypocrits around. Blair , Brown, Harman , Thornbury and many on green benches. All very very rich and pretending to look after the poor. They are just lining there pockets.
Labour we are all equal but some are more equal than others! And yes, Corbyn gone with any hope of on side of the working people. And yes, starter did try stop brexit. Hows any of this tosh? Are you lefty by any chance?
Do you have to be poor to be able to help the poor?
Do you have to avoid becoming rich in order to help the poor?
Has anything they have done to warn money harmed the poor?
Sweeping generalisations are easy to make but difficult to justify when asked to.
Corbyn was not electable as Prime Minister, whatever his policies. You achieve nothing at all of you are not in power, do you?
How did Starmer try to "stop" Brexit? By wanting Parliamentary debate and vote on the deal? Wasn't recovering Parliamentary sovereignty one of the reasons for Brexit? Did we get a good deal? If so, why has it just been renegotiated, again?
Why did Starmer do something wrong if Boris Johnson is the one who illegally prorogued Parliament to prevent a democratic debate?
I wouldn't describe it as "tosh" I would describe it as assertions without evidence. Empty sound bites. Give them some substance."1 and 2 You don't have to be insanely wealthy! FFS how much TAX starmer paying, millionaire lawyer 3 Warn money wtf?? 4 I agree with you 5 Starmer now seems to have come round to corbyns original position – accepting the vote and trying to get best out of Europe. Starmer cost corbyn the 2019 General Election by making the party parade unpopular Remain position for 3 YEARs after vote to leave. 2nd ref and all that. Vile man. You must be off your head if you think starmer hasn't changed his brexit stance to appeal to leave voters | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Responding to the budget, for the opposition, is an unenviable task for even the most talented. The late John Smith was fair at it, as was William Hague. Jeremy Corbyn was hopeless. Starmer appeared guilty of reading out his prepared speech and mainly ignoring what the Chancellor announced. The 'sticking plaster politics' analogy was wheeled out repeatedly and tediously yet again. There was awkwardness on the opposition benches as Mr Hunt sat down and the faces of Rachel Reeves and Angrier Rayner, either side of Captain Hindsight, looked shocked and anxious. He tried to address the pension giveaway - a 'handout' to the richest 1%, he said. I suppose at the end of budget day, no one cares much about the leader of the opposition's response. But surely Starmer could have done much better than a sloganised, prepared speech. Wooden, inflexible, weak jokes, the politics of envy, little recognition of exogenous global events and no plan of his own, is this what awaits us?
You've always got upset in the past when people use foolish nicknames, Pat.
What's changed?
The budget was delivered as robotically and with as slogans as the response.
The budget received the appropriate response.
Budget was dull and starmer reply duller. Choice at next election is crap - dull or duller both with dodgy money. Nowt for working man
Starmer is not in the same league as Sunak, the latter is increasingly impressive
Starmer is however like all socialists a massive hypocrite. He's unlikely to think about you or the working class once he's elected, but meantime will say anything to get your vote. He ditched Corbyn and the working class, whose Brexit decision he detested and tried to delay/overturn, when he realised that failed miserably in Dec 2019
Utter tosh from you as usual
Eh? A lot I know will agree with exactly this. Like Abbott sends son to private school, but is against them!
Labour politicians are the worst hypocrits around. Blair , Brown, Harman , Thornbury and many on green benches. All very very rich and pretending to look after the poor. They are just lining there pockets.
Labour we are all equal but some are more equal than others! And yes, Corbyn gone with any hope of on side of the working people. And yes, starter did try stop brexit. Hows any of this tosh? Are you lefty by any chance?
Do you have to be poor to be able to help the poor?
Do you have to avoid becoming rich in order to help the poor?
Has anything they have done to warn money harmed the poor?
Sweeping generalisations are easy to make but difficult to justify when asked to.
Corbyn was not electable as Prime Minister, whatever his policies. You achieve nothing at all of you are not in power, do you?
How did Starmer try to "stop" Brexit? By wanting Parliamentary debate and vote on the deal? Wasn't recovering Parliamentary sovereignty one of the reasons for Brexit? Did we get a good deal? If so, why has it just been renegotiated, again?
Why did Starmer do something wrong if Boris Johnson is the one who illegally prorogued Parliament to prevent a democratic debate?
I wouldn't describe it as "tosh" I would describe it as assertions without evidence. Empty sound bites. Give them some substance.
1 and 2 You don't have to be insanely wealthy! FFS how much TAX starmer paying, millionaire lawyer
3 Warn money wtf??
4 I agree with you
5 Starmer now seems to have come round to corbyns original position – accepting the vote and trying to get best out of Europe. Starmer cost corbyn the 2019 General Election by making the party parade unpopular Remain position for 3 YEARs after vote to leave. 2nd ref and all that. Vile man.
You must be off your head if you think starmer hasn't changed his brexit stance to appeal to leave voters
"You didn't actually answer the first two points. Are you not allowed to be rich to try to help the poor? Has anyone done anything illegal to make their money? Typo warm=earn. Starmer was Head of the CPS. Of course he earned a lot of money and is now an MP and leader of the opposition, which his salary reflects. What do you expect? Why and how do you think that Starmer was able to "make" Corbyn do anything? Parliament was illegally prorogued, wasn't it? What was wrong with Parliament having a vote on if the (now multiply failed) Brexit "deals" were acceptable to the country's elected MPs? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"starmer is not poor we can agree. He won't use his wealth to help poor. If he gets in, he will make you and I average person pay for it as usual. He will keep gold played pension with no cap and keep top tax at 40 %. I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. What has got to do with Labour loosing touch with working people and becoming hyoicrits do as I say not as I do? It is dispairung who to vote for next time. " For the record the top rate of tax is 45%. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. " If this is the kind of thing the electorate believe. What hope is there for any positive change in this country? This kind of misinformation isn't uncommon, and the electorate is largely disengaged, uninterested and not paying attention. At least this is how it seems. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"starmer is not poor we can agree. He won't use his wealth to help poor. If he gets in, he will make you and I average person pay for it as usual. He will keep gold played pension with no cap and keep top tax at 40 %. I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. What has got to do with Labour loosing touch with working people and becoming hyoicrits do as I say not as I do? It is dispairung who to vote for next time. " How much wealth do you think Starmer has? Let's say £5M, how far do you think that would go towards 'helping the poor'? I'll give you a clue, it wouldn't register. Anti Brexit sorts got together to agree to an illegal prorogation of Parliament designed to speed up Brexit? I'm not quite sure you're clear on that. What are Labour asking you to do but aren't doing themselves? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. If this is the kind of thing the electorate believe. What hope is there for any positive change in this country? This kind of misinformation isn't uncommon, and the electorate is largely disengaged, uninterested and not paying attention. At least this is how it seems." How rude to someone who is not alone in expressing this kind of view! Boris was a landslide winning PM and the Left wing blob has been determined to do something about it since Dec 2019. Now we find out Sue Gray was still advising the Government on the contentious inquiry into Mr Johnson's conduct while secretly talking about moving to Labour HQ. This absolutely smells to high heaven and explains why Starmer got away with Currygate when Boris just had cake after work at what was at the time his residential address!! Typical labour sleaze. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"starmer is not poor we can agree. He won't use his wealth to help poor. If he gets in, he will make you and I average person pay for it as usual. He will keep gold played pension with no cap and keep top tax at 40 %. I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. What has got to do with Labour loosing touch with working people and becoming hyoicrits do as I say not as I do? It is dispairung who to vote for next time. For the record the top rate of tax is 45%." OK he'll keep top tax at 45%. I still It is dispair who to vote for next time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. If this is the kind of thing the electorate believe. What hope is there for any positive change in this country? This kind of misinformation isn't uncommon, and the electorate is largely disengaged, uninterested and not paying attention. At least this is how it seems. How rude to someone who is not alone in expressing this kind of view! Boris was a landslide winning PM and the Left wing blob has been determined to do something about it since Dec 2019. Now we find out Sue Gray was still advising the Government on the contentious inquiry into Mr Johnson's conduct while secretly talking about moving to Labour HQ. This absolutely smells to high heaven and explains why Starmer got away with Currygate when Boris just had cake after work at what was at the time his residential address!! Typical labour sleaze. " has the been a development on the sure gray claims ? Last I read there was no evidence of any over lap. Good thing there is a Tory majority enquiry who will correct any conflict ???? You will have to talk me how this explains currygate tho. Was she involved in that too? I wonder if any other residential address had as many covid fines as his. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"starmer is not poor we can agree. He won't use his wealth to help poor. If he gets in, he will make you and I average person pay for it as usual. He will keep gold played pension with no cap and keep top tax at 40 %. I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. What has got to do with Labour loosing touch with working people and becoming hyoicrits do as I say not as I do? It is dispairung who to vote for next time. How much wealth do you think Starmer has? Let's say £5M, how far do you think that would go towards 'helping the poor'? I'll give you a clue, it wouldn't register. Anti Brexit sorts got together to agree to an illegal prorogation of Parliament designed to speed up Brexit? I'm not quite sure you're clear on that. What are Labour asking you to do but aren't doing themselves?" Do you think he is a man of the people? That Sunak is? There all so removed from us they don't get us any more. Insulated against crime, migrants, travel delays, all have private schools, medicine, drugs gangs, who do you suggest I vote for. I work 50 plus hours per week, never claim benefit, can barely make ends meet, rent gone up to £1299. No holidays for 5 years, which party represeht me? It's not Torries and don't think it's labour these days. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. If this is the kind of thing the electorate believe. What hope is there for any positive change in this country? This kind of misinformation isn't uncommon, and the electorate is largely disengaged, uninterested and not paying attention. At least this is how it seems. How rude to someone who is not alone in expressing this kind of view! Boris was a landslide winning PM and the Left wing blob has been determined to do something about it since Dec 2019. Now we find out Sue Gray was still advising the Government on the contentious inquiry into Mr Johnson's conduct while secretly talking about moving to Labour HQ. This absolutely smells to high heaven and explains why Starmer got away with Currygate when Boris just had cake after work at what was at the time his residential address!! Typical labour sleaze. has the been a development on the sure gray claims ? Last I read there was no evidence of any over lap. Good thing there is a Tory majority enquiry who will correct any conflict ???? You will have to talk me how this explains currygate tho. Was she involved in that too? I wonder if any other residential address had as many covid fines as his. " Don't you think it's a bit dodgy to be secretly speaking to starmer while still being closeley involved in such a very sensitive and political matter? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. If this is the kind of thing the electorate believe. What hope is there for any positive change in this country? This kind of misinformation isn't uncommon, and the electorate is largely disengaged, uninterested and not paying attention. At least this is how it seems. How rude to someone who is not alone in expressing this kind of view! Boris was a landslide winning PM and the Left wing blob has been determined to do something about it since Dec 2019. Now we find out Sue Gray was still advising the Government on the contentious inquiry into Mr Johnson's conduct while secretly talking about moving to Labour HQ. This absolutely smells to high heaven and explains why Starmer got away with Currygate when Boris just had cake after work at what was at the time his residential address!! Typical labour sleaze. " I can defend myself thanks you
Agree very fishy but | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". I no parliament was stopped illegal by Boris but it was anti Brexit sorts who got together to agree this. If this is the kind of thing the electorate believe. What hope is there for any positive change in this country? This kind of misinformation isn't uncommon, and the electorate is largely disengaged, uninterested and not paying attention. At least this is how it seems. How rude to someone who is not alone in expressing this kind of view! Boris was a landslide winning PM and the Left wing blob has been determined to do something about it since Dec 2019. Now we find out Sue Gray was still advising the Government on the contentious inquiry into Mr Johnson's conduct while secretly talking about moving to Labour HQ. This absolutely smells to high heaven and explains why Starmer got away with Currygate when Boris just had cake after work at what was at the time his residential address!! Typical labour sleaze. has the been a development on the sure gray claims ? Last I read there was no evidence of any over lap. Good thing there is a Tory majority enquiry who will correct any conflict ???? You will have to talk me how this explains currygate tho. Was she involved in that too? I wonder if any other residential address had as many covid fines as his. Don't you think it's a bit dodgy to be secretly speaking to starmer while still being closeley involved in such a very sensitive and political matter? "was she? I haven't seen any evidence of this, but may have missed something recently. Her report was finished over a year ago. That's a long neogotian period. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
