Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

Astonishing win in terms of margin. I was surprised that the ex-Labour candidate polled as low as 8%, but I guess word spread about his removal and he was viewed, effectively, as another independent.

Even if he wasn't removed, I think Galloway still wins, so it was a stroke of luck for Starmer in that he can ignore this defeat.

I thought Galloway would be out when the GE rolls around; now I'm not 100% sure. The issue of Gaza is hurting Labour amongst its once almost guaranteed Muslim vote.

I think this result shows that an Islamic party, if led by a brilliant campaigner, is a very viable option for the future. They could stand in areas where the Muslim population is relatively high and maybe win a couple of dozen seats at a GE, being similar to the SNP in terms of insurgency.

No name Bertie wrote:The Conservatives have elected female leaders, non white leaders, an Asian heritage leader, a black leader.   Now we get to see who the true racists are.

Not really. Now we get a bit more insight into your good self.

So bob and kemi fall out over leaving the echr and she makes him shadow justice secretary?

This is already a very unserious regime

GSC wrote:So bob and kemi fall out over leaving the echr and she makes him shadow justice secretary?

This is already a very unserious regime

Lyndon Johnson always said it's better to have your enemies inside peeing out.....than outside peeing in.

Justice secretary answers to the Home secretary anyway...He hasn't got any of the big 5 jobs...

Kemi Badenoch rather predictably looking completely out of her depth at the second PMQs in a row.

I wonder how long she'll last.

Starmer is already sick of having to deal with her. She may actually be worse at this than Truss was. No chance she leads them into a GE.

Oh, FFS:

Biden reneges on enforcing 30-day aid threat re. Israel

I mean, it was always going to go this way. It's blatantly obvious that anything the US, UK or anyone else (except Ireland?) says/does in a pathetic attempt to influence Israel is just words, while knowing full well it just gives Israel yet more cover and time to continue its hideous behaviour.

navyblueshorts wrote:Oh, FFS:

Biden reneges on enforcing 30-day aid threat re. Israel

I mean, it was always going to go this way. It's blatantly obvious that anything the US, UK or anyone else (except Ireland?) says/does in a pathetic attempt to influence Israel is just words, while knowing full well it just gives Israel yet more cover and time to continue its hideous behaviour.

Seemed obvious to me Blinken was just stalling for time and paying minimal lip service during his quick trips over there. Always found it a bit two-faced especially when I saw him meeting with the Saudis and Qataris. Also wondered what they must really be thinking about his words over there  - in contrast to what was being discussed behind their backs in Washington. You could see it in his face / body language.

Pal Joey wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Oh, FFS:

Biden reneges on enforcing 30-day aid threat re. Israel

I mean, it was always going to go this way. It's blatantly obvious that anything the US, UK or anyone else (except Ireland?) says/does in a pathetic attempt to influence Israel is just words, while knowing full well it just gives Israel yet more cover and time to continue its hideous behaviour.

Seemed obvious to me Blinken was just stalling for time and paying minimal lip service during his quick trips over there. Always found it a bit two-faced especially when I saw him meeting with the Saudis and Qataris. Also wondered what they must really be thinking about his words over there  - in contrast to what was being discussed behind their backs in Washington. You could see it in his face / body language.

Genocide is okay if it's your friends doing it.

Will be interesting to see how the ICC warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant play out.

Of course, obviously it's wrong to charge them, but OK to charge Putin...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Pal Joey wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Oh, FFS:

Biden reneges on enforcing 30-day aid threat re. Israel

I mean, it was always going to go this way. It's blatantly obvious that anything the US, UK or anyone else (except Ireland?) says/does in a pathetic attempt to influence Israel is just words, while knowing full well it just gives Israel yet more cover and time to continue its hideous behaviour.

Seemed obvious to me Blinken was just stalling for time and paying minimal lip service during his quick trips over there. Always found it a bit two-faced especially when I saw him meeting with the Saudis and Qataris. Also wondered what they must really be thinking about his words over there  - in contrast to what was being discussed behind their backs in Washington. You could see it in his face / body language.

Genocide is okay if it's your friends doing it.

From a great distance. It's the coward's prerogative of course.

Live case study for the voting reformers here, the Irish general election. STV, with 3-5 member districts. RTE have a map that takes you through the results count by count https://www.rte.ie/news/election-24/results/#/national

One quirk there is that it turns out there is a certain level of strategy required for parties in terms of candidate selection: Sinn Féin cost themselves seats last time because they didn't stand enough, having cost themselves seats the time before by standing too many. A potential example this time is Fine Gael in Cavan-Monaghan (https://www.rte.ie/news/election-24/results/#/cavan-monaghan), where a 21.4% vote share should get them at least one of the five seats on offer, but might leave them empty-handed.

https://findoutnow.co.uk/blog/voting-intention-4th-dec-2024/

First poll of December puts Labour down to 3rd. Tories 26%, Reform 24% and Labour 23%. Four of the last eight polls giving the Tories (very narrow) leads.

A very confused political landscape, five months on from the last GE.

In today's world people want instant results. Politics has become like football - if Labour don't stop the boats and make us all richer in the first 100 days, people want a new manager.

Also doesn't really make any difference whatsoever with a massive majority and over 4 years left in office

Might as well say 110% of people intend to vote for Kermit the frog

Hmm. "The most moral army" ? The IDF does its utmost to protect civilians?

Not a good look:

Gaza: Patterns of harm analysis - Airwars

Aside from the irony of the liquidation of the Gaza ghetto, I also note the ongoing drive for, dare I say it, lebensraum in Gaza, Golan Heights, West Bank etc advocated by so many of that utterly 'moral' State, and all so ably abetted by most of the 'civilised West'.

GSC wrote:Also doesn't really make any difference whatsoever with a massive majority and over 4 years left in office

Might as well say 110% of people intend to vote for Kermit the frog

If it continues it'll put pressure on Starmer, so I wouldn't say it doesn't make any difference.

Labour will already be looking to 2029 and winning it. If the polling doesn't look good in the run up, internal pressure will mount on Starmer, and he'll have to pivot to short-term goals for early reward, rather than any long-term vision he might have.

JuliusHMarx wrote:In today's world people want instant results. Politics has become like football - if Labour don't stop the boats and make us all richer in the first 100 days, people want a new manager.

Well they've certainly stepped up the deportations.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/15/deportations-reach-five-year-high-despite-concerns-of-rights-groups

Interesting to have a slightly more right-wing government than the Tories in charge.

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:Also doesn't really make any difference whatsoever with a massive majority and over 4 years left in office

Might as well say 110% of people intend to vote for Kermit the frog

If it continues it'll put pressure on Starmer, so I wouldn't say it doesn't make any difference.

Labour will already be looking to 2029 and winning it. If the polling doesn't look good in the run up, internal pressure will mount on Starmer, and he'll have to pivot to short-term goals for early reward, rather than any long-term vision he might have.

We're years away from any of that plausibly being relevant. 4 years before the previous election the Tories held a polling lead.

Its very funny watching Elon Musk tell Farage to Frak off after all this time of Farage sucking up to him.

...and we wonder why so many in the UK are so disgruntled:

FTSE 100 bosses make more money in 2025 by noon on Jan 6th than average worker in a year

navyblueshorts wrote:...and we wonder why so many in the UK are so disgruntled:

FTSE 100 bosses make more money in 2025 by noon on Jan 6th than average worker in a year

When does it start trickling down?

Reform tied at the top with Labour in the first published poll entirely in 2025. More polls like this might see, finally, the collapse of the Tory party, as their voters realise that only Reform can stop Labour and shift accordingly.

Greens also moving up steadily, after getting just under 7% of the vote in the last GE. Their presence is increasingly harmful to Labour.

When you have a situation such as this, with five parties polling between 11% and 25% and no clear dominance for any single party, the case for PR is clearer than ever.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1404j3xmxdo

And maybe a general election isn't too far away.

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1404j3xmxdo

And maybe a general election isn't too far away.

In your dreams. There's no way Starmer is calling one before he has to.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1404j3xmxdo

And maybe a general election isn't too far away.

In your dreams. There's no way Starmer is calling one before he has to.

Starmer wouldn't, but if the government collapses then it's a maybe.

Liz Truss sending a Cease & Desist to Keir Starmer telling him to stop saying she crashed the economy is peak British politics.

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1404j3xmxdo

And maybe a general election isn't too far away.

Lol, in your dreams.

navyblueshorts wrote:...and we wonder why so many in the UK are so disgruntled:

FTSE 100 bosses make more money in 2025 by noon on Jan 6th than average worker in a year

I'm not disgruntled. I also don't begrudge those with more money than me. Some people seem to be way overpaid for what they do but that's always been the case. Can anyone justify wages a premier league footballer "earns". If someone is a multi-millionaire, good luck to them.

Duty281 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1404j3xmxdo

And maybe a general election isn't too far away.

In your dreams. There's no way Starmer is calling one before he has to.

Starmer wouldn't, but if the government collapses then it's a maybe.

It won't.

Samo wrote:Liz Truss sending a Cease & Desist to Keir Starmer telling him to stop saying she crashed the economy is peak British politics.

Yeah. The politician most lacking any sense of self-awareness? Ever? She's an utter , and to think she was our PM for, what, 49 days? Jesus H Christ.

mountain man wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:...and we wonder why so many in the UK are so disgruntled:

FTSE 100 bosses make more money in 2025 by noon on Jan 6th than average worker in a year

I'm not disgruntled. I also don't begrudge those with more money than me. Some people seem to be way overpaid for what they do but that's always been the case. Can anyone justify wages a premier league footballer "earns". If someone is a multi-millionaire, good luck to them.

I don't mind there being those 'earning' more than me, even a lot more. You're correct that it's always been the case that some are clearly overpaid for what they do, but I suggest that the difference between these FTSE100 CEOs and their average employee is now beyond a joke. The ratio of CEO pay-to-worker pay was ~20:1 in 1965 and ~59:1 in 1989. It was nearly 400:1 in 2021 (source). It's not even as if they're any better at their job now cf. 60 years ago.

So a worker earns say £40k a year. CEO gets £2M. Would said worker feel any better if CEO "only" got £500k. Doubt it. If CEOs get their money at expense of others, that is workers wages kept low solely so bosses can get more then that is a justifiable grievance. Not sure that is case though.

mountain man wrote:So a worker earns say £40k a year. CEO gets £2M. Would said worker feel any better if CEO "only" got £500k. Doubt it. If CEOs get their money at expense of others, that is workers wages kept low solely so bosses can get more then that is a justifiable grievance. Not sure that is case though.

If the ratio is 400:1, the the CEO would be getting £16M. I suspect workers would feel better if the CEO earned £10M and the other £6M was allocated to the workers' salaries/benefits.

If a CEO is getting £16M then that must be a massive company in which case £6m is doing nothing when spread out amongst employees.

There was that company in Seattle that increased minimum salaries to $70k and the CEO cut his own salary by $1m and the company flourished and is still operating today. Who would have thought that a workforce that isnt stressing out of their nuts about bills, groceries or healthcare are more happy and therefore more productive?

mountain man wrote:If a CEO is getting £16M then that must be a massive company in which case £6m is doing nothing when spread out amongst employees.

Oh, well, the CEO may as well keep it for himself then.

Samo wrote:There was that company in Seattle that increased minimum salaries to $70k and the CEO cut his own salary by $1m and the company flourished and is still operating today.  Who would have thought that a workforce that isnt stressing out of their nuts about bills, groceries or healthcare are more happy and therefore more productive?

Well duh but that's not the point. Point is why begrudge someone earning a lot. As I've already said if you read it, as long as CEO etc not getting a huge payout at expense of lower paid workers then no issue from me.

mountain man wrote:If a CEO is getting £16M then that must be a massive company in which case £6m is doing nothing when spread out amongst employees.

The highest paid CEO in the US, according to this - https://aflcio.org/paywatch/highest-paid-ceos - earns $200M. The company, TPG Inc., has 1850 employees. Maybe all of them earn millions, who knows?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

mountain man wrote:If a CEO is getting £16M then that must be a massive company in which case £6m is doing nothing when spread out amongst employees.

Oh, well, the CEO may as well keep it for himself then.

Or herself. Shocking sexism on this board.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

mountain man wrote:If a CEO is getting £16M then that must be a massive company in which case £6m is doing nothing when spread out amongst employees.

Oh, well, the CEO may as well keep it for himself then.

Or herself. Shocking sexism on this board.

I guess so, if it's a company that makes kitchen appliances or nail varnish.

mountain man wrote:

Samo wrote:There was that company in Seattle that increased minimum salaries to $70k and the CEO cut his own salary by $1m and the company flourished and is still operating today.  Who would have thought that a workforce that isnt stressing out of their nuts about bills, groceries or healthcare are more happy and therefore more productive?

Well duh but that's not the point. Point is why begrudge someone earning a lot. As I've already said if you read it, as long as CEO etc not getting a huge payout at expense of lower paid workers then no issue from me.

Most 'workers' over the last 30 or so years have seen the buying power of their salaries continually eroded, and their ability to buy a home becoming increasingly difficult, whilst at the same time those CEOs etc have seen their salaries and stock options skyrocket. I wonder why those same 'workers' might find the excessive pay and remunerations for those at the top somewhat galling?

Spicy first poll from YouGov since the last election:

Labour: 26%; Reform UK: 25%; Conservatives: 22%; Lib Dems: 14%; Green: 8%; SNP: 3%.

Only 54% of 2024 Labour voters are sticking with Labour in this poll.

Interestingly, Reform are 3rd with 18-24 year olds - Labour leading this group with 36%, then the Greens with 22% and then Reform with 19%.

With male voters, Reform are leading; with women voters, Reform are 3rd and Lab/Con are tied.

There is a pleasing symmetry in that the older voters are, the stronger the Reform and Tory vote gets; while the younger the voters are, the stronger the Labour and Green vote gets. The Lib Dems have no real differences in support across the generations, which is curious for a party which used to have great control of the young vote.

Labour currently under huge pressure politically, especially Reeves, so Starmer's already facing a pivotal few months ahead of the local elections.

Duty281 wrote:Spicy first poll from YouGov since the last election:

Labour: 26%; Reform UK: 25%; Conservatives: 22%; Lib Dems: 14%; Green: 8%; SNP: 3%.

Only 54% of 2024 Labour voters are sticking with Labour in this poll.

Interestingly, Reform are 3rd with 18-24 year olds - Labour leading this group with 36%, then the Greens with 22% and then Reform with 19%.

With male voters, Reform are leading; with women voters, Reform are 3rd and Lab/Con are tied.

There is a pleasing symmetry in that the older voters are, the stronger the Reform and Tory vote gets; while the younger the voters are, the stronger the Labour and Green vote gets. The Lib Dems have no real differences in support across the generations, which is curious for a party which used to have great control of the young vote.

Labour currently under huge pressure politically, especially Reeves, so Starmer's already facing a pivotal few months ahead of the local elections.

When posting new poll details please remember to insert several of these - '.........'. Thanks.

It seems that Reform UK will tear itself apart as the party searches for meaning beyond single issues. Politics and power.

Duty281 wrote:Spicy first poll from YouGov since the last election:

Labour: 26%; Reform UK: 25%; Conservatives: 22%; Lib Dems: 14%; Green: 8%; SNP: 3%.

Only 54% of 2024 Labour voters are sticking with Labour in this poll.

Interestingly, Reform are 3rd with 18-24 year olds - Labour leading this group with 36%, then the Greens with 22% and then Reform with 19%.

With male voters, Reform are leading; with women voters, Reform are 3rd and Lab/Con are tied.

There is a pleasing symmetry in that the older voters are, the stronger the Reform and Tory vote gets; while the younger the voters are, the stronger the Labour and Green vote gets. The Lib Dems have no real differences in support across the generations, which is curious for a party which used to have great control of the young vote.

Labour currently under huge pressure politically, especially Reeves, so Starmer's already facing a pivotal few months ahead of the local elections.

We're over four years away from the next general election so the polls mean absolutely nothing at the moment.

Certainly too far out to predict any election result. But the polls do matter in the sense of dominating party behaviour.

If Labour slip to 3rd in the polls, worst case scenario, then Starmer is unlikely to survive until 2029, and his party will begin moving against him.

If Reform continue to lead the Tories, then there exists the potential of a snowball effect where more and more Tory voters cross over to Reform, as they would see Reform being the best chance of removing Labour from number ten (the opposite of what is usual). And being third would also heap the pressure on Badenoch and might mean she gets removed before the next GE, like IDS in 2003.

And if Reform drop to 3rd, don't make any inroads, then Farage will be under increased pressure. Equally, we'll hear a lot more talk about 'Prime Minister Farage' should Reform start leading polls with any regularity.