Next Prime Minister (with October 2022 poll)

Privatisation without competition is just inefficient and worse than leaving services in public hands, It is the usual Tory way giving it to friends etc at the expense of the public purse while claiming it will improve services,

 

Ha ha Yes I am! You should know this by now

 

Post of the year, Well done

 

Because as I stated to you before the voting is now really on an an x factor level. The Blues have been run like Chelsea hence why more on the MP's seem to be backing The Rat currently to be the next PM.

Labour ought to promoting itself as a TEAM. The accent should be on the shadow cabinet, if you like, not just the leader. The aim should be to make Angela Rayner, David Lammy, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy, Rachel Reeves, Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper, Stella Creasy, Bridget Philipson etc better known figures, and part of a team that will bring back ('British') cabinet government and illustrate the power of unity and collective effort. Their faces, not just Starmer's, should be all over election posters.

Johnson's going now (we think) but the same principle should be applied against his successor. The Labour Team v Fishy Rishy. The Labour Team v Truss. The Tories have been rather helpful in recent weeks in letting us know how much they hate each other. All the more reason for Labour showing itself to be a band of brothers and sisters who will promise, among other things, to bring back cabinet government and joined-up-thinking.

Unfortunately, people like yourself and others got lost in what politics is really about. Labour need to brake this rubbish like we have an American voting system. Voting on who we like rather than which GOVERNMENT will serve the country best!

BORIS JOHNSON WAS AN UTTER JOKE!

 

It's a combination of poor, divided opposition and Brexit.
The last election was a complete one-off - a total outlier from normal. It was won on two issues - 'Get Brexit Done' and the perceived unelectability of Corbyn.

Don't forget that more people actually voted against the Tories than for them in the last election. Also, contrary to popular belief (and his own) Johnson was not personally popular as a leader - his approval ratings were poor, even as he was achieving a landslide win. He was extremely fortunate to win two elections - vs the Maybot for party leader and vs Corbyn for PM - against two terrible opponents and riding the back of a populist wave, in Brexit. In no other circumstances would he have ended up as PM, let alone with an 80+ majority.

You are correct that it will be difficult to overturn that majority. But anti-Tory voters and the two main opposition parties are now much more savvy about tactical voting and not campaigning in seats that they can't win. Many Tory MPs in southern and Red Wall seats are cacking themselves at the possibility of being booted out by tactical voting from Labour and LibDem voters. The Tories have benefitted for decades from their opposition being split between two other parties. It's about time that changed.

 

Tom Tugendhat is effectively dragging out the process now. He should just stand down. The natural move for Braverman supporters to move to is Badenoch and the question is will they move there and potentially put Truss in trouble.

Mordaunt picked up more votes than anyone else in the last set of results meaning the smear campaign against her which appears to be taking shape as all other candidates are worried about going head to head in a poll of member with her based on polling.

I think the Tories would have been better with Johnson still in charge rather than having one of his main cabinet members replacing him, they are making their own "Corbyn" mistake if they put Sunak or Truss in charge.

 

I reckon they'll split between Truss and Badenoch. Looks like it's going to be close between them in the next round. Badenoch's lack of ministerial experience may count against her.

 

I think you're right and it's maybe for the best, give her a cabinet post and she'll be stronger next time...

 

gullible electorate

 

I think you have to put that question to those who voted in an ABC election. Anyone But Corbyn.

That 80+ majority can be easily overturned.

This Tory leader election is now down to a farce of doomed losers doing deals with likely winners to bag plumb cabinet posts. They are no longer voting for the best PM, they are voting themselves into cabinet..

Then party members are offered a choice of just 2?

This is not democracy.

 

Yes, the Labour Party has been in turmoil since the 2010 election. Their big mistake was in not countering the lie that Cameron and Osborne kept repeating - that Labour crashed the economy' by overspending. Refusing to challenge that meant they had nowhere to go when Osborne and co scorch-earthed the economy for ten years with their ridiculous counterproductive Austerity Economics. The uncharacteristically terrible performance of Yvette Cooper and Andy Burnham in the leadership elections following Ed Milliband's resignation was a consequence of that failure - everyone was too scared to fight the big lie, which left them floundering for alternatives to Osborne's savage cuts.

Despite his obvious flaws, Corbyn came close to winning in 2017, demonstrating that the electorate was by then tiring of the Tories' relentless assault on public sector services, the years of shrinking real wages and the ever-growing gap between the rich and the rest of us.

Had the 2019 been a 'normal' election, without the two massive issues of Brexit and Corbyn, the Tories would almost certainly have been out on their ear or we'd have had a hung Parliament. The landslide win was a very fortunate combination of two extreme and unusual circumstances that catapulted the least competent politician in living memory into power.

Starmer needs to up his game, no doubt. But he has restored discipline in the LP and has put together the nucleus of a competent cabinet in waiting. Given the current deteriorating circumstances, whoever leads the Tories will need to work some serious economical miracles in the next two years to get another outright majority, I reckon.

 

End of the day you are both wrong.

The reason making industries publicly run is a bad thing is because when it was done in the past all the workers had rights which created costs. Also the industries were not run like businesses in a world where trade demanded it.

Yet privatisation also hasnt worked for the nation in any shape or form. Public funds are being paid to private businesses who want to take a wedge of that as profit. Its never going to provide the best service when profits and private ownership are hanging over them. Or in the case of energy, a bunch of the biggest providers are owned by the French state. As well as the rail sector.

What we need is state owned private enterprises. I can give you a very good example. The East Coast Mainline which was taken over by virgin in 2015 or 2016. Up until it was sold the East Coast Mainline was a state owned private company. It was run as a business. Its workers did not have the protections and pensions of public servants which created efficiencies. Its trains ran on time, I was a weekly user to London, sometimes twice a week from Leeds. Yet when it was sold to Virgin I was often turning up late to client meetings, we calculated it was just under 50% of the time.

The state owned the rail company and the profits could go into the exchequer but due to the absolute farce of Tory ideology they did not want to have a publicly run enterprise and sold it. Regardless of its competency at making us cash.

As always the best solution is often found in the centre ground.

 

boris getting in meant we all lost