Politics, politics, politics

[scaramanga]

@scaramanga - I assume that you are not overjoyed at the choice ahead either. Whilst I know that you would never vote for them in a million years, a lot of your views seem closer to the Orange Book liberals than they are to May's regressive Christian interventionism.

I am thoroughly ambivalent about this one. I broke the habit of a lifetime last election and voted for the Student Party because of their opposition to May poking her nose into our business - it was a fairly empty gesture though with Chichester being one of the safest Conservative seats going. I can't say for certain I'd have done that if I were in a close seat.

I disagree with a lot of what May believes in, I don't think she's socially liberal and neither do I think she's particularly fiscally Conservative.

If there were a politician around who was what Tony Blair said he was (rather than the spendy, spendy, taxy stealy type he really was) then I'd vote for them regardless of party.

 

[scaramanga]

Why? Look around the world and it exists. State run transportation is common. Car companies or plane manufacturers are often part state owned, within countries that have free enterprise. Why are the two mutually exclusive?

If the state owns more than it requires then it isn't really small. No state is efficient, it always has drag compared to the private sector - for that reason states will always bloat and be less efficient than the alternative.

If a state owns an industry then there is no free choice for consumers, neither is there an option for private industry to operate in free competition because the state will always have a monopoly (and an unfair advantage as it never has to balance its books).

 

[milo]

I am thoroughly ambivalent about this one. I broke the habit of a lifetime last election and voted for the Student Party because of their opposition to May poking her nose into our business - it was a fairly empty gesture though with Chichester being one of the safest Conservative seats going. I can't say for certain I'd have done that if I were in a close seat.

I disagree with a lot of what May believes in, I don't think she's socially liberal and neither do I think she's particularly fiscally Conservative.

If there were a politician around who was what Tony Blair said he was (rather than the spendy, spendy, taxy stealy type he really was) then I'd vote for them regardless of party.

I think that Blair's reading of the current situation is right and that there is a huge gap in the centre to be exploited but no one is in a position to do so and our electoral system puts new parties at a massive disadvantage.

 

[monkeybarry]

The sooner Britain has compulsory voting, the better.

I agree on a practical level.
However, what is your view of that from a democratic and/or liberty angle?

My view is there needs to be a mechanism in place to say "none of you lot, try again" - but not just a simple "none of the above" as that doesn't really do much.

 

[milo]

I agree that May's conservatism is primarily social illiberalism and it could take a particularly nasty tone if she had her own mandate rather than borrowing someone elses. She's far more of a Daily Mail Tory than a Times one.

 

[SpurMeUp]

If the state owns more than it requires then it isn't really small. No state is efficient, it always has drag compared to the private sector - for that reason states will always bloat and be less efficient than the alternative.

If a state owns an industry then there is no free choice for consumers, neither is there an option for private industry to operate in free competition because the state will always have a monopoly (and an unfair advantage as it never has to balance its books).

It's an outdated perspective that oversimplifies things. The state owns RBS bank. It doesn't bloat the state. Because we are referring to two separate things: the government and private companies that are publicly owned, normally partly publicly owned. What difference does it make if the majority shareholder of a company is a pension fund or the state? How does that share holding 'bloat' the state?

With state intervention, France has a strong car manufacturing industry. Europe has an alternative plane maker to Boeing, Boeing itself exists because of the state. Many renewable enterprises rely on the state. Tesla, the company, would not exist without the state's massive tax incentives and direct funding. But Tesla is still an efficient, free market company. Tesla or Boeing or airbus or French railways don't halt free choice for consumers. Monopolies are not allowed regardless of who owns the monopoly, but if there has to be a monopoly - as in the case of railways - isn't it better that it is a state monopoly?

Re. a small state, I really mean efficient government that is run more like private enterprise. Unfortunately, Ministries - the arms of government - are horribly inefficient, and badly run. Regardless of whether Conservatives are in power or Labour.

 

[monkeybarry]

I think that Blair's reading of the current situation is right and that there is a huge gap in the centre to be exploited but no one is in a position to do so and our electoral system puts new parties at a massive disadvantage.

This is true and is also key for labour to recognise very quickly. If they can focus on the Tory electroral fraud (discredit is always powerful in UK politics) and find two or three really strong middle ground positions (NHS is the trump card for them, then either housing or social welfare - i would suggest housing is their best bet) then they can shoot for a mass coalition with SNP, Plaid, Lib and the NI parties (and NI rhetoric will definitely be worth keeping an eye on with Brexit - everyone has avoided that question so far).....Still seems a long shot though.

I can't see why many people would vote Tory (although the UK population have a habit of voting against themselves - subservience is in our nature), but even fewer reasons to vote labour.
But that could be to labours advantage - no reasons NOT to vote for them, so they have a blank canvas.

With Brexit they sort of have the perfect position to offer the "UK dream" - being economically as successful as the US and socially as successful as Scandinavia.....We all know that is undeliverable, but the electorate see stupid and easily sold to.

The biggest challenge is getting anyone to give a damn.

 

[milo]

This is true and is also key for labour to recognise very quickly. If they can focus on the Tory electroral fraud (discredit is always powerful in UK politics) and find two or three really strong middle ground positions (NHS is the trump card for them, then either housing or social welfare - i would suggest housing is their best bet) then they can shoot for a mass coalition with SNP, Plaid, Lib and the NI parties (and NI rhetoric will definitely be worth keeping an eye on with Brexit - everyone has avoided that question so far).....Still seems a long shot though.

I can't see why many people would vote Tory (although the UK population have a habit of voting against themselves - subservience is in our nature), but even fewer reasons to vote labour.
But that could be to labours advantage - no reasons NOT to vote for them, so they have a blank canvas.

With Brexit they sort of have the perfect position to offer the "UK dream" - being economically as successful as the US and socially as successful as Scandinavia.....We all know that is undeliverable, but the electorate see stupid and easily sold to.

The biggest challenge is getting anyone to give a damn.

The other line I would take is that an election now is not in the national interest and the Tories are putting themselves ahead of the country. Theresa May's line about the uncertainty of another Scottish independence referendum should be used against her, particularly when Norther Ireland is currently without a government.

 

[monkeybarry]

The other line I would take is that an election now is not in the national interest and the Tories are putting themselves ahead of the country. Theresa May's line about the uncertainty of another Scottish independence referendum should be used against her, particularly when Norther Ireland is currently without a government.

Definitely agree with that.
Although i would caution against too much negativity, people will just turn off (exactly what the Tories want) - i think the opportunity here is for some really positive politics for people to get behind. So reframing that with a solution rather than just "they are bad, look what bad things they've done"

 

[Gutter Boy]

The Lib Dems made a mistake electing Farron as leader. They obviously did so before Corbyn was elected, but if they'd've held the centre ground (electing Norman Lamb), rather than going for their own loon, they'd be in a much stronger position now. At the moment most people just think Tim Farron is the Defence Secretary (Michael Fallon), but when they get to know him and his views, that's going to be a real issue attracting centrist voters.

Personally I usually vote Lib Dem. I have a good local MP who is on the orange book wing. However this one election I will switch to Conservative solely on their 'delivering Brexit' ticket.

 

[Gutter Boy]

The other line I would take is that an election now is not in the national interest and the Tories are putting themselves ahead of the country. Theresa May's line about the uncertainty of another Scottish independence referendum should be used against her, particularly when Norther Ireland is currently without a government.

The thing is, there's no one to deliver those messages. Sturgeon is provocatively anti-English (85% of the electorate) and Corbyn and Farron are clowns that don't appeal beyond the radical wings of their members. All the decent people and good communicators with potentially broader appeal in both parties have been marignalised over the last two years.

 

[milo]

As the Brexit argument is largely now about trade, this article is worth a read

https://medium.com/@SamuelMarcLowe/can-global-britain-defy-gravity-18df4e9f4f7f

It covers a lot of stuff that we have discussed in this thread but it is worth a refresher because we are going to get told a lot of guff again in the next eight weeks.

 

[milo]

Definitely agree with that.
Although i would caution against too much negativity, people will just turn off (exactly what the Tories want) - i think the opportunity here is for some really positive politics for people to get behind. So reframing that with a solution rather than just "they are bad, look what bad things they've done"

The other line to add to that is that it is also bad for our chances of getting a good Brexit deal. We have a strict two years to agree our exit terms and we are wasting a couple of months on an election.

The counter argument will be that nothing will happen until after the French and German elections. Which poses the question, who trigger A50 in March.

The Tories putting themselves above the country line could carry and be repeated by all other parties.

 

[milo]

The Lib Dems made a mistake electing Farron as leader. They obviously did so before Corbyn was elected, but if they'd've held the centre ground (electing Norman Lamb), rather than going for their own loon, they'd be in a much stronger position now. At the moment most people just think Tim Farron is the Defence Secretary (Michael Fallon), but when they get to know him and his views, that's going to be a real issue attracting centrist voters.

Personally I usually vote Lib Dem. I have a good local MP who is on the orange book wing. However this one election I will switch to Conservative solely on their 'delivering Brexit' ticket.

The only out there views that Farron has are his religious ones. He was elected because he didn't serve in the coalition and therefore wasn't tainted.

It is ironic though that both the Labour Party and Lib Dems would probably be in a stronger position if they were lead by the leaders that took them into the last election and did so badly.

 

[milo]

One final prediction and then i will shut up. May will dodge any televised debates. She is a wooden performer, is miles ahead and doesn't have anything to gain from sharing a platform with the other leaders.

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

Having been around for a long time it amazes me that all the parties will tell the electorate that they will sort out the NHS despite two of them having proved in the past they have no solution to the state monster. No party will face the truth that it is virtually impossible to support as it stands and radical changes have to be made, most that will be unacceptable to the voters.

 

[monkeybarry]

The other line to add to that is that it is also bad for our chances of getting a good Brexit deal. We have a strict two years to agree our exit terms and we are wasting a couple of months on an election.

The counter argument will be that nothing will happen until after the French and German elections. Which poses the question, who trigger A50 in March.

The Tories putting themselves above the country line could carry and be repeated by all other parties.

I don't think the Brexit line works, her speech was all about Westminster unity - so she will say she is going to the people to vote for the type of Brexit they want based on manifestos.

And who is going to use the "Tories putting themselves first" line?
Labour? No - that's basically saying "we know we are brick, but look at them being mean.... Please vote for our brickneds"
The others? No - they need labour to do well to have any hope of keeping the Tories out.

You might get traction from the media though.

 

[milo]

I've never voted in an election before (despite being eligible since the late 90s and having a politics degree), because I viewed all options as emasculated. Maastricht had made voting pointless - we were stuck in faceless unaccountable technocrat hell. The EU referendum was the first time I've ever been to a polling station, because I felt there was something at stake, a once in a lifetime chance to reclaim power for the common people.

Personally I usually vote Lib Dem. I have a good local MP who is on the orange book wing. However this one election I will switch to Conservative solely on their 'delivering Brexit' ticket.

 

[milo]

I don't think the Brexit line works, her speech was all about Westminster unity - so she will say she is going to the people to vote for the type of Brexit they want based on manifestos.

And who is going to use the "Tories putting themselves first" line?
Labour? No - that's basically saying "we know we are brick, but look at them being mean.... Please vote for our brickneds"
The others? No - they need labour to do well to have any hope of keeping the Tories out.

You might get traction from the media though.

That's just a bonkers argument. The whole point of Westminster is that MPs are meant to represent their constituents and not just wave through the government's wishes. We have a paid opposition for a reason, if only they were a bit better at doing their job.

 

[milo]

https://twitter.com/x/status/854423442334130176