2 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Or it might make things even worse, because the overconfident narcissistic idiots like Boris and Trump are convinced they're not going to fail so won't care, but it would put off more sensible candidates without such an exaggerated view of their own talents... 😞 

 

At least it would provide low cost public entertainment, much like the hangings outside Newgate Prison used to...

4 minutes ago, cuthound said:

 

At least it would provide low cost public entertainment, much like the hangings outside Newgate Prison used to...

But it wouldn't get us better politicians, because there will always be a queue of rich narcissistic idiots waiting to step in and do it better... 😉 

 

(and there seems to be a pretty much endless supply of them, going by the makeup of both HoC and especially HoL at the moment, plus the candidates putting themselves up as MPs at every election...)

Edited June 24Jun 24 by IanD

Just now, IanD said:

But it wouldn't get us better politicians, because there will always be a queue of rich narcissistic idiots waiting to step in and do it better... 😉 

 

Then it would do the world a favour be reducing the number of rich narcissistic idiots... 🤣

Just now, cuthound said:

 

Then it would do the world a favour be reducing the number of rich narcissistic idiots... 🤣

Agreed -- but until the supply runs out (if it ever does) we'd get even worse politicians than today.

 

Are you really sure that's what you want? Sounds to me a bit like shooting yourself in the foot to make a point of principle, rather like Brexit... 😞 

Apparently Rachel Reeves is almost certainly on her way as well. 
Oh dear.
She wasn't much of a Chancellor but she was, by a huge margin, the best looking one, ever !

1 minute ago, Justin Smith said:

Apparently Rachel Reeves is almost certainly on her way as well. 
Oh dear.
She wasn't much of a Chancellor but she was, by a huge margin, the best looking one, ever !

mmmmm not sure she could even claim that?.....  

4 hours ago, Justin Smith said:

She wasn't much of a Chancellor but she was, by a huge margin, the best looking one, ever !

Do you mean best-looking female one ever, or best looking of any sex?

Japan has always been very restrictive on immigration.

They are now paying the price. A price that countries that actually enact populist nativist immigration policies will also end up paying.

Japan now has a huge and still rapidly growing pool of  pensioners, and high needs pensioners,  coupled with a sharp decline in the numbers of workers to support them,or even care for them. 

This is a result of both a very low birthrate,  but also their young are increasingly emigrating.

Emigrating to countries that give them "more freedom" Freedom from stifling conservative social norms of their home country. 

Japans industrial outputs are falling as a result of now skilled labour shortages and off- shoring. Off-shoring that off-shored the technology with it, so now the considerable  advances in technology are elsewhere. Who would have thought two decades ago that Sony and Panasonic would now just became name plates on TVs, not only made elsewhere, but actually fully designed elsewhere using non Japanese more advanced technology.

Korea may well be following a similar trajectory but a generation behind.

 

The industrial north of Britain experienced something similar after WW2

The elderly remained, but youngsters decamped, not only in pursuit of work, but equally important, to escape the stifling conservative social norms of their homelands.

 

RESTORE, or REFORM, but to what? 

Past, narrow-minded,  misogynistic, racist bigotry? 

 

 

12 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

Do you mean best-looking female one ever, or best looking of any sex?

Well I do not find men attractive so she's got no competition really. But having said that I think she is quite attractive anyway !

 

11 hours ago, DandV said:

 to escape the stifling conservative social norms of their homelands.

I empathise with them as I live in a country where one has to be ultra careful what one says in order not to offend anyone (particularly Trans activists who are VERY, aggressively, militant), one cannot video ones own child at school performances, one cannot go out when a virus (which 99% are surviving) is about, one cannot even look out of the door drop light at the steam engine pulling ones train, one is forced to drive at 20mph even on main through roads, etc etc

Edited June 25Jun 25 by Justin Smith

Oh god, it's on about videoing children AGAIN!!
And Covid!!
And trains!!
And speed limits!!

I wonder when it will answer the question posed by several about drug taking?

33 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

Oh god, it's on about videoing children AGAIN!!
And Covid!!
And trains!!
And speed limits!!

I wonder when it will answer the question posed by several about drug taking?

He can't answer it because if he says drugs should be legalised that puts him in the "lefty" Green Party camp, if he says they shouldn't he proves he's only a libertarian when it suits him.

8 hours ago, Ange said:

if he says they shouldn't he proves he's only a libertarian when it suits him.

 

Let's be blunt, in other words a selfish twit, much as a number of us decide when he started his posting on these hobbyhorses. I really do not understand why, as he finds the UK so controlling, he does not either take up politics to try to change it, or go to a country that better meets his needs. One thing is for sure, he will alter absolutely nothing by posting his stuff on forums, which just annoys/upsets people. That seems to confirm the selfish twit label.

Edited June 26Jun 26 by Tony Brooks

Maybe he, as an immigrant, should just go back where he came from.

Bloody furriners🤔

 

Edited June 26Jun 26 by GUMPY

2 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

Let's be blunt, in other words a selfish twit, much as a number of us decide when he started his posting on these hobbyhorses. I really do not understand why, as he finds the UK so controlling, he does not either take up politics to try to change it, or go to a country that better meets his needs. One thing is for sure, he will alter absolutely nothing by posting his stuff on forums, which just annoys/upsets people. That seems to confirm the selfish twit label.

 

What I don't understand is why he posts this rubbish on a boating forum, albeit usually in the political bit.

 

As best as I can recall only one of his early posts was boat related and that was complaining about the lack of shelf space in the bathroom of a boat he had hired.

3 hours ago, cuthound said:

As best as I can recall only one of his early posts was boat related and that was complaining about the lack of shelf space in the bathroom of a boat he had hired.

 

There was another post about hiring where he complained about the lack of a gauge for the water tank.

I'm still struggling to understand exactly what Kier Starmer did wrong. Yes there were some unpopular policies like winter fuel allowance that labour reversed, but to be honest I think that policy itself was right, just the threshold which was wrong. Why should poor young people subsidise rich property owning older people's winter fuel? It shouldn't be a universal benefit based only on age.

 

I also think Starmer wasn't given enough credit for things he did right like dealing with Trump and keeping the UK out of the war with Iran. No UK PM has stood up to a US president in that way since Harold Wilson/Vietnam. He may be wooden and uncharismatic but I don't care about that. I just want stability.

 

However, Starmer's unpopularity is a fact. It started after the Southport stabbings and there's been a right wing campaign against him since then. A lot of working class people really hate Starmer even if the reasons aren't clear. I'm to the left of Starmer so one would think I'd welcome Andy Burnham but I worry more about the political stability of this country.

 

Andy Burnham is obviously popular (for now). However I don't think that's going to last and I don't think Burnham is going to save this Labour party administration long term against the Reform bandwagon. My worry is that Burnham will only last a couple of years until the next general election and Reform will get in. Then eventually the country will realise Reform don't know what they're doing and the economy will suffer and working class people will start to hate Farridge too.

 

At that point the UK's self-destructive culture may make the country ungovernable.

I think the right wing campaign started before the last election. Basically vested interests looking after their interests. .. Gym

22 minutes ago, blackrose said:

I'm still struggling to understand exactly what Kier Starmer did wrong. 

 

He was marginally left of centre, so the media decided to crucify him with lies and half truths, and the non thinking sheeple swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

 

I hate to think what awaits Andy Burnham.

53 minutes ago, blackrose said:

I'm still struggling to understand exactly what Kier Starmer did wrong

 

A small, off the top of my head list, in no particular order. Different ones will have upset different parts of the electorate. You can't please everyone all the time. Starmer's great skill seems to be doing at least one thing that will alienate every segment. It is nearly all stuff he could have chosen to have done differently, so almost entirely his choice. 

 

He routinely lies to the electorate. He thinks this is fine to get elected. First to become Labour leader, see his ten pledges to the party membership and to be Corbyn in a suit. Then to the country, promising a nebulous "change", then changing almost nothing. People remember this stuff and compare notes. They resent being taken for mugs. 

 

The biggie. Continuing the Tory support for the genocide in Gaza. Diplomatic cover, military intelligence and weapons. Destruction of our civil liberties in support of a foreign power carrying out horrendous crimes.  

 

Even his supposedly standing up to Trump didn't stop him letting the US use British bases, refueling planes, etc for their illegal war. Starmer never could see a fence he wasn't prepared to sit on. It pleases no one and just gave him splinters in his bum. 

 

Freebies. Straight in to Downing St, he and his team were out to grab everything they could. Again, not a good look, after fourteen years of Tory corruption. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss vibes straight away for someone elected mostly on a platform of not being the Tories. He didn't see how anyone could think this was a problem. 

 

U turns. Winter fuel allowance, two child benefit cap etc etc etc. I am surprised he hasn't u turned on his resignation. It gives the impression of someone with no actual policies, or core philosophy, other than to try and get through that day. 

 

Trying to ape Reform UK, copying their policies and supporting their framing of society's issues, in a futile attempt to get votes from their supporters. Any Reformite, is only going to vote for the real thing, or someone even more extreme. He only succeeded in alienating Labour's usual supporters. 

 

The voice didn't help. Even Thatcher had elecution lessons. 

 

 

28 minutes ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

 

A small, off the top of my head list, in no particular order. Different ones will have upset different parts of the electorate. You can't please everyone all the time. Starmer's great skill seems to be doing at least one thing that will alienate every segment. It is nearly all stuff he could have chosen to have done differently, so almost entirely his choice. 

 

He routinely lies to the electorate. He thinks this is fine to get elected. First to become Labour leader, see his ten pledges to the party membership and to be Corbyn in a suit. Then to the country, promising a nebulous "change", then changing almost nothing. People remember this stuff and compare notes. They resent being taken for mugs. 

 

The biggie. Continuing the Tory support for the genocide in Gaza. Diplomatic cover, military intelligence and weapons. Destruction of our civil liberties in support of a foreign power carrying out horrendous crimes.  

 

Even his supposedly standing up to Trump didn't stop him letting the US use British bases, refueling planes, etc for their illegal war. Starmer never could see a fence he wasn't prepared to sit on. It pleases no one and just gave him splinters in his bum. 

 

Freebies. Straight in to Downing St, he and his team were out to grab everything they could. Again, not a good look, after fourteen years of Tory corruption. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss vibes straight away for someone elected mostly on a platform of not being the Tories. He didn't see how anyone could think this was a problem. 

 

U turns. Winter fuel allowance, two child benefit cap etc etc etc. I am surprised he hasn't u turned on his resignation. It gives the impression of someone with no actual policies, or core philosophy, other than to try and get through that day. 

 

Trying to ape Reform UK, copying their policies and supporting their framing of society's issues, in a futile attempt to get votes from their supporters. Any Reformite, is only going to vote for the real thing, or someone even more extreme. He only succeeded in alienating Labour's usual supporters. 

 

The voice didn't help. Even Thatcher had elecution lessons. 

 

 

Your first paragraph is what many of us have said all along and is bang on the nail. Never in my lifetime has any government alienated every demograph, every government keeps somebody on side so to speak, until Starmers attempts that is. Its as though he wants no senior voters, no farmers, no business owners, no housing Landlords, no second home owners, no car owners..... The list is literaly endless. Talk about playing into Reforms hands, he is trying his best to gift Reform a huge number of seats at the next General election. 

It's not what he did, it's how he did it.  A great leader can halve your wages and still make you feel good about it.  A rotten leader takes 5% off your wages and grovels apologetically about it and leaves you feeling really bad about it.  Starmer was clearly in the latter category.  The 'U' turn on Winter Fuel Payments told us all how weak he was, and the country, deep down in its soul, subconsciously recognised that.

57 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Your first paragraph is what many of us have said all along and is bang on the nail. Never in my lifetime has any government alienated every demograph, every government keeps somebody on side so to speak, until Starmers attempts that is. Its as though he wants no senior voters, no farmers, no business owners, no housing Landlords, no second home owners, no car owners..... The list is literaly endless. Talk about playing into Reforms hands, he is trying his best to gift Reform a huge number of seats at the next General election. 

To which you can add, no lefties, no centrists, no environmentalists. You could argue that a supposedly centre left government is always going to struggle with support from some of your demographics. Business owners, second home owners, landlords, are the sort of traditional Tory petty bourgoisie that have never been a natural fit for Labour. He managed to alienate them as badly as a proper lefty would, while also alienating Labour's usual supporters, to end up with no one. Starmer's particular skill seems to be hacking off people with a policy, then u-turning on it. He doesn't get any support back from those he hacked off by the original policy and ends up looking weak and undecided. Farmland inheritance tax loophole is a good example. 2 child benefit, winter fuel allowance also .

I thought he was a decent bloke really, sorry to see him go. 😁

15 minutes ago, smiler said:

I thought he was a decent bloke really, sorry to see him go. 😁

Lol, but its true really, he weakened the dreadful labour party faster than a speeding bullet. 

5 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

 

A small, off the top of my head list, in no particular order. Different ones will have upset different parts of the electorate. You can't please everyone all the time. Starmer's great skill seems to be doing at least one thing that will alienate every segment. It is nearly all stuff he could have chosen to have done differently, so almost entirely his choice. 

 

He routinely lies to the electorate. He thinks this is fine to get elected. First to become Labour leader, see his ten pledges to the party membership and to be Corbyn in a suit. Then to the country, promising a nebulous "change", then changing almost nothing. People remember this stuff and compare notes. They resent being taken for mugs. 

 

The biggie. Continuing the Tory support for the genocide in Gaza. Diplomatic cover, military intelligence and weapons. Destruction of our civil liberties in support of a foreign power carrying out horrendous crimes.  

 

Even his supposedly standing up to Trump didn't stop him letting the US use British bases, refueling planes, etc for their illegal war. Starmer never could see a fence he wasn't prepared to sit on. It pleases no one and just gave him splinters in his bum. 

 

Freebies. Straight in to Downing St, he and his team were out to grab everything they could. Again, not a good look, after fourteen years of Tory corruption. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss vibes straight away for someone elected mostly on a platform of not being the Tories. He didn't see how anyone could think this was a problem. 

 

U turns. Winter fuel allowance, two child benefit cap etc etc etc. I am surprised he hasn't u turned on his resignation. It gives the impression of someone with no actual policies, or core philosophy, other than to try and get through that day. 

 

Trying to ape Reform UK, copying their policies and supporting their framing of society's issues, in a futile attempt to get votes from their supporters. Any Reformite, is only going to vote for the real thing, or someone even more extreme. He only succeeded in alienating Labour's usual supporters. 

 

The voice didn't help. Even Thatcher had elecution lessons. 

 

 

 

I think you could probably apply that list in different ways to most politicians of every political persuasion. Every single policy of any govt is bound alienate a certain section of society.

 

What I think you're failing to appreciate is the accelerated public cynicism that's overtaking this country, driven in part by critical media coverage and right-wing anti- establishment populism. Criticism is fine of course, but it's become relentless and threatens to undermine the entire democratic political system. 

Edited June 26Jun 26 by blackrose