Next GE

[Good old]

I'm not at all sure that Starmer , will try to be another Blair, He certainly hasn't got the face wide grin. But beyond that I think his policy is more likely to be more solidly Labour ,  than just New Labour.
The Tories have to come out of the next four years looking as if they really have got complete control of what could well be a very difficult period. It might depend on who is the PM at that time. If not the country might well be looking for a solid steady performer and that could be Starmer.
As he pointed out this morning. When Boris, was getting sacked for writing lies in his column ,and waffling about bent bananas . He Starmer, was prosecuting terrorists. In a crisis that might well ring a bell.

Instead of a team of spin doctors maybe he needs a brilliant PR, with a background in Hollywood..?

I think you are right that Starmer will not try to emulate Blair - he simply doesn't seem to have those skills. But any PM needs to have an understanding of the peoples' pulse and I can't quite believe that he will have that skill either. He is going to have to do an amazing amount of work to get his party to back him wholeheartedly and that demands a set of skills too. Interesting times.

[T00ts]

I'm not at all sure that Starmer , will try to be another Blair, He certainly hasn't got the face wide grin. But beyond that I think his policy is more likely to be more solidly Labour ,  than just New Labour.
The Tories have to come out of the next four years looking as if they really have got complete control of what could well be a very difficult period. It might depend on who is the PM at that time. If not the country might well be looking for a solid steady performer and that could be Starmer.
As he pointed out this morning. When Boris, was getting sacked for writing lies in his column ,and waffling about bent bananas . He Starmer, was prosecuting terrorists. In a crisis that might well ring a bell.

I think you are right that Starmer will not try to emulate Blair - he simply doesn't seem to have those skills. But any PM needs to have an understanding of the peoples' pulse and I can't quite believe that he will have that skill either. He is going to have to do an amazing amount of work to get his party to back him wholeheartedly and that demands a set of skills too. Interesting times.

[Good old]

I'm not at all sure that Starmer , will try to be another Blair, He certainly hasn't got the face wide grin. But beyond that I think his policy is more likely to be more solidly Labour ,  than just New Labour.
The Tories have to come out of the next four years looking as if they really have got complete control of what could well be a very difficult period. It might depend on who is the PM at that time. If not the country might well be looking for a solid steady performer and that could be Starmer.
As he pointed out this morning. When Boris, was getting sacked for writing lies in his column ,and waffling about bent bananas . He Starmer, was prosecuting terrorists. In a crisis that might well ring a bell.

[T00ts]

The major difference between Starmer and Blair - and I'm trying to think a bit more like the average punter, women especially - is the death stare. He has no personality. He might just as well be an abacus. He won't carry the female vote for my money. He is ankle deep in some sort of clay and analytical he might be but it takes more than that in this personality conscious world. Whatever comes out of his mouth is killed off by his facial expression. I haven't ever seen him smile yet.  It doesn't bode well for his public image and I know that shouldn't be important but it is and it will be.

Well Toots, if you are looking for a legover artist then Boris should be PM for a while yet.

That said, the next few years should be interesting. A depression is due and that usually favours the left, but this flu fuss has shown that Boris is quite happy to fire up the presses and print the money necessary to coast through it, so maybe things will be different this time.

That's one thing I would not be looking for and I am not really sure it came into the equation much when he won either the leadership or the election. For many he was the only man with apparent chutzpa to play the EU at their own game and get us out. I actually believe that once/if he does that his appeal will largely end. I think the rumours that he will quit are probably true. I hope he completes the overhaul of Whitehall which is long overdue and I hope there will someone with ability who can guide the country safely over the next few years to give us the chance to revitalise the economy.  This is not a stupid man by any means so I am hopeful that he will sort his head out, although I still believe he is in long covid.

[Borg Refinery]

I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

I am for PR because it would stop the sheep of a majority government voting for nasty policies.

The only problem I would have to put up with would be people like Nigel Farage becoming an MP.

Well yes that is a very good point. All sorts of radicals would be drinking No 10 coffee. It doesn't bear thinking about.

It's worth accepting some fruitcases for more democracy..works well in Europe. I wouldn't read anything into this forum's cabinet, we are all fruitcases on here.  (But you've got to make allowances for the prepubescent twots and wee furry growlers self projecting their childish tendencies).

[Thomas]

I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

I am for PR because it would stop the sheep of a majority government voting for nasty policies.

The only problem I would have to put up with would be people like Nigel Farage becoming an MP.

Well yes that is a very good point. All sorts of radicals would be drinking No 10 coffee. It doesn't bear thinking about.

   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54241844

Dunno Toots. Reading between the lines Starmer's main concern appears to be getting into Number Ten. He does not seem bothered by Brexit and will, as you have said, move towards the centre. So provided we are out of the EU by 2024, I can't say that I am overly bothered if Tony Blair (Mark 2) gets back into power.

The major difference between Starmer and Blair - and I'm trying to think a bit more like the average punter, women especially - is the death stare. He has no personality. He might just as well be an abacus. He won't carry the female vote for my money. He is ankle deep in some sort of clay and analytical he might be but it takes more than that in this personality conscious world. Whatever comes out of his mouth is killed off by his facial expression. I haven't ever seen him smile yet.  It doesn't bode well for his public image and I know that shouldn't be important but it is and it will be.

I think so toots.

When he talks he is constantly described as being "wooden" in delivery.

Totally cold emotionless and passionless.

What  a contrast between starmer and milliband for example , and leaders like kinnock smith and blair.

Corbyn always sounded to me like the local union official meeting the boys down the pub for a quiet pint and a moan .

[Borchester]

The major difference between Starmer and Blair - and I'm trying to think a bit more like the average punter, women especially - is the death stare. He has no personality. He might just as well be an abacus. He won't carry the female vote for my money. He is ankle deep in some sort of clay and analytical he might be but it takes more than that in this personality conscious world. Whatever comes out of his mouth is killed off by his facial expression. I haven't ever seen him smile yet.  It doesn't bode well for his public image and I know that shouldn't be important but it is and it will be.

Well Toots, if you are looking for a legover artist then Boris should be PM for a while yet.

That said, the next few years should be interesting. A depression is due and that usually favours the left, but this flu fuss has shown that Boris is quite happy to fire up the presses and print the money necessary to coast through it, so maybe things will be different this time.

[T00ts]

I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

I am for PR because it would stop the sheep of a majority government voting for nasty policies.

The only problem I would have to put up with would be people like Nigel Farage becoming an MP.

Well yes that is a very good point. All sorts of radicals would be drinking No 10 coffee. It doesn't bear thinking about.

   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54241844

Dunno Toots. Reading between the lines Starmer's main concern appears to be getting into Number Ten. He does not seem bothered by Brexit and will, as you have said, move towards the centre. So provided we are out of the EU by 2024, I can't say that I am overly bothered if Tony Blair (Mark 2) gets back into power.

The major difference between Starmer and Blair - and I'm trying to think a bit more like the average punter, women especially - is the death stare. He has no personality. He might just as well be an abacus. He won't carry the female vote for my money. He is ankle deep in some sort of clay and analytical he might be but it takes more than that in this personality conscious world. Whatever comes out of his mouth is killed off by his facial expression. I haven't ever seen him smile yet.  It doesn't bode well for his public image and I know that shouldn't be important but it is and it will be.

[papasmurf]

Well yes that is a very good point. All sorts of radicals would be drinking No 10 coffee. It doesn't bear thinking about.

What does not bear thinking about is the current doctrinal based sheep in government.

[Borchester]

I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

I am for PR because it would stop the sheep of a majority government voting for nasty policies.

The only problem I would have to put up with would be people like Nigel Farage becoming an MP.

Well yes that is a very good point. All sorts of radicals would be drinking No 10 coffee. It doesn't bear thinking about.

   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54241844

Dunno Toots. Reading between the lines Starmer's main concern appears to be getting into Number Ten. He does not seem bothered by Brexit and will, as you have said, move towards the centre. So provided we are out of the EU by 2024, I can't say that I am overly bothered if Tony Blair (Mark 2) gets back into power.

[T00ts]

I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

I am for PR because it would stop the sheep of a majority government voting for nasty policies.

The only problem I would have to put up with would be people like Nigel Farage becoming an MP.

Well yes that is a very good point. All sorts of radicals would be drinking No 10 coffee. It doesn't bear thinking about.

[papasmurf]

I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

I am for PR because it would stop the sheep of a majority government voting for nasty policies.

The only problem I would have to put up with would be people like Nigel Farage becoming an MP.

[T00ts]

Well I must say that any system that ends up with anything that remotely resembles the Forum Cabinet thread would be a disaster. How can the electorate expect any clarity of leadership and direction with so much constant bartering and disagreement? It was bad enough when Clegg made his choice to join Cameron, imagine that spread across several parties.

Tails would be wagging dogs, manifesto promises would be splintering everywhere, and worst of all without a clear cut vote not even a GE would relieve the chaos. I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

[Barry]

Really. How is that? It has not been replaced with anything else in England.

It should be replaced though. Democracy is now a dogs breakfast, FPTP is long past it's sell by date.

I agree. We should have PR by party list. But look out for lots of horse trading to get deals similar to the 2010 coalition.

[srb7677]

Frankly FPTP is dead,

Really. How is that? It has not been replaced with anything else in England.

He probably means dead as an accepted and respected concept of the way a democracy should work. Whether he is right on that or not is another issue.

I personally though believe it is no longer a morally or democratically defensible system. When in 2015 the SNP with 2 million votes got nearly 60 seats, whilst UKIP with 4 million got just one, when in 2005 Labour won a substantial majority with only 35% of the vote, and suchlike anomalies, how can anyone defend that?

Under FPTP, most votes end up being wasted, voting for who you support can often be a waste of time, so people vote tactically for someone they don't support just to try and keep a worse nightmare out, and two thirds of the electorate live in seats so safe they might as well not bother. The whole thing is democratically indefensible.