That speech

[silver fox]

Ah well, we ended up with the lesser of two weevils...

We ended up with a populist tosser, popularity based very much on similar lines to much of social media, where the number of “likes” or followers are the measure of success.

[Tentill4]

should not the whole country be demanding a change?

Well let me think on that......No I don't, because there is no one better yet, Labour need to pull their finger out and choose someone soon that is electable, as Starmer isn't the one..

[Tentill4]

We ended up with a populist tosser, popularity based very much on similar lines to much of social media, where the number of “likes” or followers are the measure of success.

Populist tosser or not, he's still popular, unlike anyone else.

Take the Labour front bench, according to Yougov's:-

Most Popular Politicians & Political Figures (Q3 2021)

The most popular Labour figure is Ed Miliband at No. 8, with Keir Starmer down at No.45.

Even Diane Abbott and Jeremy Corbyn are more popular.

[seivad]

Do you think that businesses analyse their poor performance by comparing actual results with the results they would have had if 'so and so' had been in charge? Of course they don't, they use facts. The only known facts are their actual results. They might want to compare them to other facts, such as similar companies with more favourable results operating in the same sector.

In the case of Covid, the only facts you have are your actions and outcome. To evaluate their success on the basis of 'can you imagine what it would have been like under Labour', is insanity. The key word is 'imagine'. You don't know and you never will. It's far more helpful to evaluate them against another known. In this case it could be a similar country with a far better outcome. Compare their actions with your own, and find out what they did, and you didn't, to achieve a better outcome. Future pandemic planning necessitates that all of our mistakes, and we've all made them, must never be repeated again.

[Toodles McGinty]

And do you actually believe that a Labour Government would have handled this situation any better, then you're deluded.
All this talk reminds of the scene from the film "Master and Commander" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAwIN8J3RAE

Not at all deluded. Just not pathetically devoted to a tribe.

I can give you a list of Starmer's faults. Or Corbyn before him, and I've never shied away from it.

That's the knee jerk reaction of all the Tory devoted, isn't it? Well whatabout Labour / Lib-Dems / *insert any party*?

As I said, what do you think Starmer or whoever would have done? Increased taxes? We've just had the biggest tax hike since WW2. Increased poverty? Poverty is going to rocket this winter. If you can't see that, well, there's no hope is there? A 'magic money tree' that wastes public finances? Really? You want a comprehensive list of the corruption and cronyism that's wasted billions of public money? A 4 day week on the way because there's no fuel? Destroyed the fishing industry? Destroyed farming? Handled the pandemic worse? Would he have to continually 'save Christmas'?

What do you think Starmer could possibly have done that's worse than Johnson?

Starmer had a costed manifesto. Johnson's manifesto was one word, repeated over and over. 'Brexit'. Brexit Brexit Brexit.

Look, I'm not a fan of Starmer. In fact, the longer he's been LOTO, the less I like him. But I'm not a simpleton who thinks stuttering away in cod-Latin or a 'it's all going to be fine, just remember you're British' speech, makes policies, runs a country or does anything apart from please a few blue rinse oldies who will vote Tory or die. We need a grown up running the country, not a p!$$ poor after dinner speaker who only gets entertaining on the third scotch. I don't care if someone is 'wooden' as long as they have the good of the country at heart. If people vote on personalities, they are ********g idiots.

So explain how Labour would have been worse, without the aid of Express headlines or Brexit bull, please.

[Tentill4]

Starmer had a costed manifesto. Johnson's manifesto was one word, repeated over and over. 'Brexit'. Brexit Brexit Brexit.

So explain how Labour would have been worse, without the aid of Express headlines or Brexit bull, please.

IFS do you?

Paul Johnson, IFS Director, said:

“The Labour Party manifesto offers a very substantial increase in the role of the state, one that is even larger than the big increase offered in their last manifesto. They estimate that their measures would push up day-to-day spending by £80 billion in 2023–24, which would be an almost 10% increase on what is currently planned. They estimate that their tax raising measures would bring in a similar sum, which if delivered would push the tax burden well above levels sustained in the UK since the Second World War. They also plan to increase investment spending by £55 billion a year, a doubling on current levels and even more than the substantial increases proposed by the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives."

I'm no fan of any party, I vote after reading the various paper, manifesto's etc and then make an informed decision.
I voted Conservatives this time round, because I had a choice of them, Labour or Lib Dems, and it was an easy choice given what the other two were proposing.
Next time, it may be Labour, who knows..

https://election2019.ifs.org.uk/arti...fs-researchers

[Toodles McGinty]

IFS do you?

Paul Johnson, IFS Director, said:

“The Labour Party manifesto offers a very substantial increase in the role of the state, one that is even larger than the big increase offered in their last manifesto. They estimate that their measures would push up day-to-day spending by £80 billion in 2023–24, which would be an almost 10% increase on what is currently planned. They estimate that their tax raising measures would bring in a similar sum, which if delivered would push the tax burden well above levels sustained in the UK since the Second World War. They also plan to increase investment spending by £55 billion a year, a doubling on current levels and even more than the substantial increases proposed by the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives."

I'm no fan of any party, I vote after reading the various paper, manifesto's etc and then make an informed decision.
I voted Conservatives this time round, because I had a choice of them, Labour or Lib Dems, and it was an easy choice given what the other two were proposing.
Next time, it may be Labour, who knows..

https://election2019.ifs.org.uk/arti...fs-researchers

Of course Labour would increase spending. As a democratic socialist, that's the attraction. Raise tax to support services. After 9 years (as it was then) of shrinking support to the NHS, police, fire service, benefits and seeing poverty rise, 100,000+ benefit claimants killed off, social care decimated, that's exactly what I wanted. Corporation tax raised. Water systems and energy supply arms in public hands - it isn't like we've a choice in that anyway. Happy to pay a little more tax, as long as it doesn't hit the pocket of the poor and those 'social housing' types that are loathed by some.

I agree with your comment in post #32, I don't think Starmer is going to lead the party to power. Not because he's 'wooden' or for any particular personality flaws. I quite like that he is the polar opposite of Johnson. Personality politics doesn't particular interest me, and conversely there are a few of the Old School Tories I don't mind. Ken Clarke for one. I thought Starmer was the next potential PM, but he's already backed down on a few election promises. I know they all lie, par for the course, but at least come up with a few policies first. And I'd like to read the Forde report. If he and his acolytes actively threw the 2017 election, Labour is finished.

Glad to read your mind is open politically. There is nothing more tedious than a debate with anyone who chooses tribalism over common sense. If I could take bits of Labour, Lib-Dems, SNP and Greens I'd be happy. Have to move the Scottish border to Liverpool, but that would work for me.

[bensherman]

Putting aside the Johnson-Starmer contest, can anyone tell me who voted Tory after seeing Moore at the pre-election hustings at Christchurch....WHY??

[Toodles McGinty]

Putting aside the Johnson-Starmer contest, can anyone tell me who voted Tory after seeing Moore at the pre-election hustings at Christchurch....WHY??

TBF, I doubt many of those attending did vote for him.

Most seemed to back the Lib-Dem and Labour candidate. Moore seemed largely irrelevant.

[bensherman]

I was staggered at his lack of grasp of the issues re Brexit.

he kept on about tariffs, which have always been a side-issue in the problems that have emerged. He did not seem to get the problem re regulation and in particular the impossibility of trade with both the EU and the US with conflicting standards.

Just lobby fodder.

[said]

TBF, I doubt many of those attending did vote for him.

Most seemed to back the Lib-Dem and Labour candidate. Moore seemed largely irrelevant.

Not to the core Southport people, he isn't.

[Alikado]

Not to the core Southport people, he isn't.

He is, just like you are to the posters on here, only good for amusement.

[Toodles McGinty]

I was staggered at his lack of grasp of the issues re Brexit.

he kept on about tariffs, which have always been a side-issue in the problems that have emerged. He did not seem to get the problem re regulation and in particular the impossibility of trade with both the EU and the US with conflicting standards.

Just lobby fodder.

Well, he is really. Never stands for anything, votes with the bosses every time. Won't rock the boat. I don't know how he serves his constituents, I've thankfully never had to enlist his services. Perhaps others on here would know more about that.

But a decent wage plus expenses, not a bad life. Probably better than an Asda manager. I have seen him strolling around town, which is better than some constituency MPs.