General Election

[Rover the Top]

Of course given you only ever refer to Labour as "they", it won't have any bearing on your politics!

I refer to all political parties as 'they', given I'm not and never will be a member of any of them... You referred to them as "they" in the post I quoted, presumably for the same reason?

I think you've missed my point. I wasn't saying Starmer is hard left - just that he's too beige to cut through against a dominant character who's already encroaching on his territory. The Tories had the same problem when Blair was PM, a series of bland leaders who were fine for the core Conservative base but weren't going to win back those who'd been enticed by New Labour.

[mrblackbat]

Are you trying to insinuate that Boris Johnson is encroaching on the centre left's territory?

Or is there someone else you have in mind there?

[Rover the Top]

Are you trying to insinuate that Boris Johnson is encroaching on the centre left's territory?

I'm not insinuating it. He's all about spend spend spend in a very un-Conservative way. It was there in the manifesto pledges, there in the budget, and it's central to how he's approaching Covid-19. He's been caricaturized as hard right because he joined the Brexit campaign, but he's really just an ambitious opportunist looking to build a legacy. The only reason he wears a blue rosette is because it gave him a better chance of getting to number 10, he doesn't actually believe in typical Tory policy.

[mrblackbat]

But he isn't close to encroaching on the centre left. He does appeal to the Brexit voter, because he backed Brexit and that accounts for the shift in working class northern England. But they weren't the centre left voters anyway. So I don't get your point.

Starmer is far more likely to appeal to the likes of me, a lib dem voter, than Corbyn ever would. I'm certainly more likely to vote for Labour under Starmer than I am a Conservative government pushing an isolationist policy.

The current crisis aside, I'd have been surprised if much of the spend put forward by Johnson would ever come about anyway. There was a whole lot of cocked figures with more hospitals etc that was simply untrue.

[Ethiaa]

I'm with Simon in that Johnson will clearly do anything to get and retain power, the craven little shit. I doubt he has backbone to retain a political ideology.

On the surface of things, the measures to support both individuals and businesses do have a left leaning approach (paying 80% of salary for people NOT working - not exactly Tory!) but the reality appears to be that the vast majority of the money ends up in the pockets of Tory donors. Sorry, I mean big business. So not that much of a change to the usual Tory approach of screwing the poor, marginalised groups, minorities, or anyone else they think they can get away with. After all, baby needs new gold plated jackboots.

Meanwhile, the same old crap goes on in the background. Probably a lot more crap than we realise given the epic smoke screen they have been given.

[Rover the Top]

Lib Dem voters are not Keir Starmer's territory though. Labour voters are. The working class are the core of the centre left, I've no idea how you can say otherwise, they are the ones the party exists for. And Boris Johnson's Conservatives just took a load of those votes (it's not just about Brexit, he became mayor in typically Labour London too before it all). If Labour have any ambitions of getting back into power, it's plainly obvious they need to win back those traditionally red seats. They aren't going to do that by trying to pinch votes from the 4th placed party that are struggling to appeal to anyone themselves.

[mrblackbat]

Right, so other party's voters aren't Starmar's territory.... but other party's voters are Johnson's territory?

What are you talking about?

The whole point is that voters aren't fixed. For Labour to win an election, they need to take voters from other parties, by appealing to people who voted for a different party, that can happen.

[Ethiaa]

Right, so other party's voters aren't Starmar's territory....

Taking this typo to it's logical conclusion, there's a Starmer waiting in the sky.

[mrblackbat]

Hehe

[Rover the Top]

Right, so other party's voters aren't Starmar's territory.... but other party's voters are Johnson's territory?

What are you talking about?

The whole point is that voters aren't fixed. For Labour to win an election, they need to take voters from other parties, by appealing to people who voted for a different party, that can happen.

What are you talking about? I said Johnson was encroaching on Labour's territory, not that Labour was Johnson's territory.

The Tories took a load of seats off Labour, won a big majority. Labour cannot get into power without taking some back, even if they swept up all the smaller parties' seats. Becoming more like the Lib Dems would be an obvious misstep. I've not the time nor inclination to work out how many seats would have been different if you combined Labour and Lib Dem results, but it would just be academic. Attempts at setting up tactical voting showed not everyone is inclined to change sides, it's improbable that in practice you'd overturn the majority by focussing on a smaller, less popular party's voters. You wouldn't convert enough and risk driving more of your existing support away. There's a reason the Lib Dems only have 11 seats... The best way to put a dent in the Conservative majority would be to attack them directly. As the last Labour leader to actually win an election did.

Right, so other party's voters aren't Starmar's territory....

Taking this typo to it's logical conclusion, there's a Starmer waiting in the sky.

It's the third time he's made it...

[mrblackbat]

Right, so other party's voters aren't Starmar's territory.... but other party's voters are Johnson's territory?

What are you talking about?

The whole point is that voters aren't fixed. For Labour to win an election, they need to take voters from other parties, by appealing to people who voted for a different party, that can happen.

What are you talking about? I said Johnson was encroaching on Labour's territory, not that Labour was Johnson's territory.

The Tories took a load of seats off Labour, won a big majority. Labour cannot get into power without taking some back, even if they swept up all the smaller parties' seats. Becoming more like the Lib Dems would be an obvious misstep. I've not the time nor inclination to work out how many seats would have been different if you combined Labour and Lib Dem results, but it would just be academic. Attempts at setting up tactical voting showed not everyone is inclined to change sides, it's improbable that in practice you'd overturn the majority by focussing on a smaller, less popular party's voters. You wouldn't convert enough and risk driving more of your existing support away. There's a reason the Lib Dems only have 11 seats... The best way to put a dent in the Conservative majority would be to attack them directly. As the last Labour leader to actually win an election did.

Right, so other party's voters aren't Starmar's territory....

Taking this typo to it's logical conclusion, there's a Starmer waiting in the sky.

It's the third time he's made it...

Honestly, I really struggle to understand what you're talking about these days. So, Johnson is encroaching on Labour's territory, but those voters aren't his territory.... but this is all irrelevant when talking about how Starmer might encroach on the centre and centre right territory, because that's not his territory... ?

Is that your logical argument? Because I'm really struggling to follow any narrative here at all....

Do you literally think that by referencing myself, a former Conservative voter, now a Lib Dem voter, that I was implying I am the only possible demographic in the centre that might find him appealing, and that only people that voted for the Lib Dems last time might switch? This is why I say it's really difficult talking to you because you only ever focus on the exact example provided. There's a good many centre right Conservative voters who wanted to remain in the EU that might well switch allegiances with a more moderate Labour leader.

[mrblackbat]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ked-report

Oops.

[Ethiaa]

I can't see the DPA claims going anywhere given the recent ruling regarding Morrisons and their leaked data barring very odd circumstances indeed.

[mrblackbat]

I can't see the DPA claims going anywhere given the recent ruling regarding Morrisons and their leaked data barring very odd circumstances indeed.

Different legislation though, the Morrisons case was pre GDPR (occurred 2013). Under GDPR the data controller has liability for pretty much all leaks.

[Ethiaa]

GDPR article 5 will result in basically the same question before a court though. The potential sanctions are higher but the fundamentals are the same. A court is now unlikely to award compensation against a body when to do so would further the aims of the individual who had caused the data breach in the first place (as I said, details of the case are fundamental though).