And the nastiest political party competition winner is .....LABOUR

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

No they voted because the opposition were not good enough.

They voted for a lying cheating buffoon.
Are you suggesting that if other parties were as deceitful at lying, cheating and buffoonery, they would have been elected?

 

[Lower]

I find it ironic that people think that the Tories are the party of the working class person. In the last 4 decades what have they done for the working class? They forced pit closures, they cut services, they didnt invest in the NHS, austerity all affects the working class more.

What they have done is pushed the culture wars, patriotism which coalesced in Brexit. The labour supporters who switched their vote to Tories was in main due to their clear stance on Brexit. Now that the Tories cannot blame everything on the EU, they will mine a rich seam about cultural issues - statues, wokism etc.

The public will still struggle and still vote for the same people who have put them in this predicament.

It's the height of conceit when I hear someone say well I need a credible alternative to the Tories, as if it's a hobsons choice - there is no real alternative.

There was an alternative choice to the Tories. Corbyn's labour party was substantially different. However, part of that problem was that Corbyn and the people he surrounding himself with weren't likeable (eg Diane Abbot, John McDonnell and Emily Thornberry) and their policies were confusing and out of touch with the majority of the voting public.

It may be called populism, but Boris offered what people thought they wanted, not what they were told they needed.

Blair's Labour in the 90's was much more centrist and was therefore more attractive to the moderate masses, which is where the Tories are nowadays in my opinion and why Keir Starmer is having such a hard time as the Tories are occupying the area where he'd like to be.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

... Keir Starmer is having such a hard time as the Tories are occupying the area where he'd like to be.

I can't see Sir Keir exhorting his cabinet to lie and commit perjury in order to cover up the indiscretions of the PM.
I can't see Sir Keir approving of his cabinet's cronyism.
I can't see Sir Keir blatantly lying to the Queen or the electorate.
I can't see Sir Keir signing international agreements with the intention of immediately breaking them.

 

[JohnD]

I can't see Sir Keir exhorting his cabinet to lie and commit perjury in order to cover up the indiscretions of the PM.
I can't see Sir Keir approving of his cabinet's cronyism.
I can't see Sir Keir blatantly lying to the Queen or the electorate.
I can't see Sir Keir signing international agreements with the intention of immediately breaking them.

but Borisites like to say "everybody does it"

as Starmer says, that excuse doesn't work for shoplifters, and it shouldn't work for a PM.

Maybe Borisites feel an innate sympathy and affinity with lying, deceiful, untrustworthy people.

 

[Lower]

I can't see Sir Keir exhorting his cabinet to lie and commit perjury in order to cover up the indiscretions of the PM.
I can't see Sir Keir approving of his cabinet's cronyism.
I can't see Sir Keir blatantly lying to the Queen or the electorate.
I can't see Sir Keir signing international agreements with the intention of immediately breaking them.

I agree, because Sir Keir won't ever be in a position to have the opportunity to do any of that.

 

[SirGalahad]

There was an alternative choice to the Tories. Corbyn's labour party was substantially different. However, part of that problem was that Corbyn and the people he surrounding himself with weren't likeable (eg Diane Abbot, John McDonnell and Emily Thornberry) and their policies were confusing and out of touch with the majority of the voting public.

It may be called populism, but Boris offered what people thought they wanted, not what they were told they needed.

Blair's Labour in the 90's was much more centrist and was therefore more attractive to the moderate masses, which is where the Tories are nowadays in my opinion and why Keir Starmer is having such a hard time as the Tories are occupying the area where he'd like to be.

People were asked about policies which they agreed with like nationalising railways, but when they said they were labour policies they hesitated. It's interesting you mention likeable - when was that a requirement - I would have though competence and integrity are more important.

I find it ironic that people who look down on celebrity culture can't help mentioning how a candidates personality, likeability and image are important. This is the cult of personality.

I wonder if the public would like their airline pilot or their dr to have the same personality traits as their PM? You would think the PM role is more important.

The culture wars cut across age groups and socio economic groups - it's worked wonders for the Republicans and I am sad to say the Tories will be following suit.

But what have Tories done for the deindustrialised north?

 

[Lower]

People were asked about policies which they agreed with like nationalising railways, but when they said they were labour policies they hesitated. It's interesting you mention likeable - when was that a requirement - I would have though competence and integrity are more important.

I find it ironic that people who look down on celebrity culture can't help mentioning how a candidates personality, likeability and image are important. This is the cult of personality.

I wonder if the public would like their airline pilot or their dr to have the same personality traits as their PM? You would think the PM role is more important.

The culture wars cut across age groups and socio economic groups - it's worked wonders for the Republicans and I am sad to say the Tories will be following suit.

But what have Tories done for the deindustrialised north?

I think its always been the case that candidates have to be likeable. I don't mean likeable as a celebrity or in appearance. I mean likeable as in people believe in them, trust in them, and think that they have their best interests at heart. People believed and trusted Thatcher and Blair, and is why they were successful at the time.

Emily Thornberry is a good example. When she came out with her derogatory comment about white van man flying his St Georges cross, she presented an arrogant, unlikeable picture of what labour MP's said in private about potential labour party voters and what should have been their core electorate.

The tories offered their levelling up agenda, which will have appealed to the those who believed that politics had become focused on a London view of the country.

 

[JohnD]

derogatory comment about white van man flying his St Georges cross

bearing in mind of course that not all voters are plumbers, and some agree with her.

 

[JohnD]

people believe in them, trust in them, and think that they have their best interests at heart.

that's obviously not true, because quite a lot of people still like Johnson.

 

[SirGalahad]

I think its always been the case that candidates have to be likeable. I don't mean likeable as a celebrity or in appearance. I mean likeable as in people believe in them, trust in them, and think that they have their best interests at heart. People believed and trusted Thatcher and Blair, and is why they were successful at the time.

Emily Thornberry is a good example. When she came out with her derogatory comment about white van man flying his St Georges cross, she presented an arrogant, unlikeable picture of what labour MP's said in private about potential labour party voters and what should have been their core electorate.

The tories offered their levelling up agenda, which will have appealed to the those who believed that politics had become focused on a London view of the country.

Interesting.

The levelling up Agengda is more great marketing. It's focused on infrastructure spending and it will be again centrally controlled in London.

The Tories have been in power for over two thirds of the time since the second world war, they have had more influence in causing the problems that these people in the North face and I don't expect them to solve their problems with the levlling up agenda.

But they get the pulse of the public better than Labour, as you point out people know what they want but necessarily what they need.

The problem with our economy is that we replaced secondary sector jobs with tertiary sector jobs which have less value add, yes it has lead to higher employment but the consequence of that is lower productivity. AI and Automation is going to cause even more societal shifts which the levelling up agenda is not addressing.

 

[SirGalahad]

The problem I have with the concept that the public knows best is that the work of Kahnemann and Taversky has pretty much obliterated that. Not only are people poor at making decisions, when they make those decisions they neither have the information they need or if they are given the information they make the decisions on the description and not the details.