RugbyRebels

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:41 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:41 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2024 3:03 pm

Please, please, please, please, please

might even get tories supporting proportional representation....not that labour would then want that. When they push through 16 year olds getting the vote, they are absolutel nailed on for years.

Some polls are suggesting that the younger vote isn’t as strong for Labour as it used to be. I suspect the
Majority are still there, if they bother to vote at all, but greens will hoover up a fair bit and reform have a number of younger voters. The young vote will definitely benefit Labour for 5-10 years but it’s possible it might not continue like that indefinitely.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:08 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:01 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 6:04 pm

putting the 16 year old vote with not being boris/gbd and covid and the `no more than that` becomes `a lot different to`...

Boris did his best to gerrymander things by introducing voter ID. Still wasn't enough. Votes for 16-17 won't be enough either if Labour don't make things better over the next 5 years.

....and where is the challenge coming from even if you cant see the big difference between the scenarios? Plus its going to be better even if Labour do as little as they`ve committed to- external events aside.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:10 pm

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:41 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:41 am
might even get tories supporting proportional representation....not that labour would then want that. When they push through 16 year olds getting the vote, they are absolutel nailed on for years.

Some polls are suggesting that the younger vote isn’t as strong for Labour as it used to be. I suspect the
Majority are still there, if they bother to vote at all, but greens will hoover up a fair bit and reform have a number of younger voters. The young vote will definitely benefit Labour for 5-10 years but it’s possible it might not continue like that indefinitely.

even 10 years is a loong time....cant see where i suggested `indefiinitely`.

Zhivago wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 1:51 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 10:41 am For what it's worth I wouldn't want the Greens setting our defence policy*, although I'd like them to set everything else.

But since they're so far, far, far removed from the chance of getting into even double figures in parliament I'm comfortable with arguing to increase that number.

* on balance I'd go Lib Dem on defence. Tories and Labour are too war-mongery and happy to support states committing war crimes.

They are the most sensible party. I'm either for them or Plaid.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2024 11:06 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2024 10:19 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2024 7:54 pm

Oh, and it gets so much worse: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... in-clacton

Maybe Clacton wasn't winnable once Farage got involved, but on the other hand, maybe it could've been! Have the frothing racist vote split between Reform and the Tories and campaign on the "Dear gods, do you really want Farage representing you?!?!" ticket and there's a route to victory there. Even if there isn't, at least they'd've *tried* to stop the literal worst person from winning. I suspect they have looked at it without ethics or morals being involved, decided that they're interested in trying to knock the Tories' MPs as low as possible, and a Reform win achieves that just as well as a Labour one does.

Puja

For fucks sake.

Honestly I am trying not to be so negative about what Labour are offering, but I’m struggling to read this as pragmatic rather than simply pathetic.

This is insane. Taking the candidate away from the seat he's fighting for??? Being angry with him for running a successful social media campaign??? Jesus Christ. I mean this election is falling into their lap but if they come up against anyone good at politics next time they won't stand a chance.

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 9:41 am

Zhivago wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 9:09 am

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 7:52 am
Without the US we won’t have the ammunition to last that long. And you seem to think that all NATO armies are equally competent, that’s far from the truth.

The Baltic states aren’t defensible in the long term. I doubt very much that we would poor in troops to defend them, there isn’t the space to trade for time to soak up Russias numerical advantage. For them we are hoping a token presence and the threat of nukes will suffice.

And of course reducing defence spending will encourage Putin to try his arm still further. Sending the signal that if you don’t hurt us we won’t hurt you, as we the Green spokesman, send the message that we won’t honour our nato commitments when severely pressed.


What we need is a united approach and strong commitment to collective defence.

We simply must not let Ukraine lose. The consequences really are dire. I don't understand people who don't get this. People like Puja who worse still, want to scrimp on our defence budget and give up our nuclear power status.

We have a saying in the Netherlands. Goedkoop is duurkoop. It means cheap is expensive. If we spend less now, it'll just be more costly in the longer term.

I was going to copy your post and just paste in "climate emergency" in all the apposite places, but it felt cheap and I think my point can be made without it. Cheap is expensive in-fucking-deed, yet when it comes to budgets and spending, it's always "Can we afford to spend on Net Zero?" not, "What use is having our own individual nuclear penis to wave around if the world is on fire?"

Puja

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 9:47 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:10 pm

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:41 pm
Some polls are suggesting that the younger vote isn’t as strong for Labour as it used to be. I suspect the
Majority are still there, if they bother to vote at all, but greens will hoover up a fair bit and reform have a number of younger voters. The young vote will definitely benefit Labour for 5-10 years but it’s possible it might not continue like that indefinitely.

even 10 years is a loong time....cant see where i suggested `indefiinitely`.

Years isn’t exactly precise.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:41 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:41 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2024 3:03 pm

Please, please, please, please, please

might even get tories supporting proportional representation....not that labour would then want that. When they push through 16 year olds getting the vote, they are absolutel nailed on for years.

Some polls are suggesting that the younger vote isn’t as strong for Labour as it used to be. I suspect the
Majority are still there, if they bother to vote at all, but greens will hoover up a fair bit and reform have a number of younger voters. The young vote will definitely benefit Labour for 5-10 years but it’s possible it might not continue like that indefinitely.

Zhivago wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:33 pm

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:41 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:41 am
might even get tories supporting proportional representation....not that labour would then want that. When they push through 16 year olds getting the vote, they are absolutel nailed on for years.

Some polls are suggesting that the younger vote isn’t as strong for Labour as it used to be. I suspect the
Majority are still there, if they bother to vote at all, but greens will hoover up a fair bit and reform have a number of younger voters. The young vote will definitely benefit Labour for 5-10 years but it’s possible it might not continue like that indefinitely.

Gen Z have been corrupted by the likes of Jordan Petersen and Joe Rogan. Millenials are the last left wing youth.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:08 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:01 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 6:04 pm

putting the 16 year old vote with not being boris/gbd and covid and the `no more than that` becomes `a lot different to`...

Boris did his best to gerrymander things by introducing voter ID. Still wasn't enough. Votes for 16-17 won't be enough either if Labour don't make things better over the next 5 years.

....and where is the challenge coming from even if you cant see the big difference between the scenarios? Plus its going to be better even if Labour do as little as they`ve committed to- external events aside.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:35 pm

Zhivago wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:33 pm

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:41 pm
Some polls are suggesting that the younger vote isn’t as strong for Labour as it used to be. I suspect the
Majority are still there, if they bother to vote at all, but greens will hoover up a fair bit and reform have a number of younger voters. The young vote will definitely benefit Labour for 5-10 years but it’s possible it might not continue like that indefinitely.

Gen Z have been corrupted by the likes of Jordan Petersen and Joe Rogan. Millenials are the last left wing youth.

There’s definitely something in there. Right wing propaganda has caught up with the left

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:47 pm

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:35 pm

Zhivago wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:33 pm

Gen Z have been corrupted by the likes of Jordan Petersen and Joe Rogan. Millenials are the last left wing youth.

There’s definitely something in there. Right wing propaganda has caught up with the left

There is always the fear than one good TikTok meme will double Reform's vote.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 4:15 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:47 pm

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:35 pm

There’s definitely something in there. Right wing propaganda has caught up with the left

There is always the fear than one good TikTok meme will double Reform's vote.

At the moment, the use of social media by reform candidates is losing them votes. Farage can hide behind a veneer of comic English stereotype and everyone’s best mate. Many of his colleagues let the mask slip.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:42 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:08 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 9:01 pm
Boris did his best to gerrymander things by introducing voter ID. Still wasn't enough. Votes for 16-17 won't be enough either if Labour don't make things better over the next 5 years.

....and where is the challenge coming from even if you cant see the big difference between the scenarios? Plus its going to be better even if Labour do as little as they`ve committed to- external events aside.

Challenge to Labour? It doesn't seem possible right now but the main selling point for Labour is 'change' - nothing intrinsic to Labour and certainly nothing about the Labour leadership. If they don't deliver 'change' their support might prove very fickle. And if the Tories reinvent themselves either by a new moderate, fresh face or more likely bring Farage into the fold (and crucially stop him from splitting the right vote) the whole situation could reverse (by 2029). Also, Starmerism is far less attractive to the youth vote than Corbynism. Support for genocide is also unpopular with the young.

I agree a Labour government is likely to do better than the continuation of this Tory one (which plans to cut spending even more to pay for the NI cut), but austerity will continue. So by 'better' I would mean 'better than the alternative' not 'getting better over time'.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 7:48 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:42 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:08 pm

....and where is the challenge coming from even if you cant see the big difference between the scenarios? Plus its going to be better even if Labour do as little as they`ve committed to- external events aside.

Challenge to Labour? It doesn't seem possible right now but the main selling point for Labour is 'change' - nothing intrinsic to Labour and certainly nothing about the Labour leadership. If they don't deliver 'change' their support might prove very fickle. And if the Tories reinvent themselves either by a new moderate, fresh face or more likely bring Farage into the fold (and crucially stop him from splitting the right vote) the whole situation could reverse (by 2029). Also, Starmerism is far less attractive to the youth vote than Corbynism. Support for genocide is also unpopular with the young.

I agree a Labour government is likely to do better than the continuation of this Tory one (which plans to cut spending even more to pay for the NI cut), but austerity will continue. So by 'better' I would mean 'better than the alternative' not 'getting better over time'.

I guess Labours change message is only ‘change from the tories’ as they aren’t offering any transformational change without reviews. So it’s possible that the demand for real change will become loud- but I think they’ll get a lot of time by dint of who else even if they don’t do much.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 7:48 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 3:42 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:08 pm

....and where is the challenge coming from even if you cant see the big difference between the scenarios? Plus its going to be better even if Labour do as little as they`ve committed to- external events aside.

Challenge to Labour? It doesn't seem possible right now but the main selling point for Labour is 'change' - nothing intrinsic to Labour and certainly nothing about the Labour leadership. If they don't deliver 'change' their support might prove very fickle. And if the Tories reinvent themselves either by a new moderate, fresh face or more likely bring Farage into the fold (and crucially stop him from splitting the right vote) the whole situation could reverse (by 2029). Also, Starmerism is far less attractive to the youth vote than Corbynism. Support for genocide is also unpopular with the young.

I agree a Labour government is likely to do better than the continuation of this Tory one (which plans to cut spending even more to pay for the NI cut), but austerity will continue. So by 'better' I would mean 'better than the alternative' not 'getting better over time'.

I guess Labours change message is only ‘change from the tories’ as they aren’t offering any transformational change without reviews. So it’s possible that the demand for real change will become loud- but I think they’ll get a lot of time by dint of who else even if they don’t do much.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 01, 2024 11:33 am Sabotage or penny-pinching incompetence, damaging our ability to make deals with the US?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... egotiators

Zhivago wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 5:51 am This should be a scandal
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... -election/
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... l-election

My poll card didn't arrive. If I needed a postal ballot i'd be screwed.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 6:46 pm C4's surprising discovery of racism within the Reform parry seems to have given the Tories a little bounce in the polls.

As it's at the expense of Reform I don't know if this is a good thing or not. Hmmmm. Probably not. The prize here is to see the Tories down to 3rd place. So even if Farage takes them over, he'll be nowhere near a despatch box.

paddy no 11 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 7:41 pm [https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... montenegro]

He was with Farage on the night of the Brexit referendum when he sensed a gambling opportunity. “At 10pm, I couldn’t believe I was still getting 9/1 [for a majority leave vote],” he told the Telegraph newspaper afterwards. “We were in our campaign office and I was tracking all the major stock indices, the dollar and pound currency markets. When it got to 3am, I was getting my managers out of bed to get me another 50 grand on here, another 50 grand there, to short sterling. I just couldn’t help myself.”

Cottrell claimed to have won a six-figure sum from shorting the pound but said he promptly “lost most of it the next day” on a horse.