Steven Fielding
H-index:
14
It is a mystery to me as well. Quite why they didn’t get into govt with a proper plan & an appreciation of what they needed to do politically is a puzzler. The Reform surge has taken everyone by surprise, but it’s partly result of their failure to be seen as & to act as a Change govt.
Labour members tend to stick with their leaders however badly they stand in the polls. They were even rather reluctant to let Corbyn go after 2019.
Yes, they do seem to be doing politics about 12 months too late.
Powell is an easy hit for anybody that doesn’t like Starmer or would like Starmer to change & she’s standing for a job which means bugger all. Nobody is taking her seriously as a political figure. That changes with a leadership campaign.
I think Powell‘s vote will be the high watermark for anything that Burnham might get. And don’t forget there is somebody called Angela Rayner out there.
Burnham will not be the next Labour leader; about anything else I’m not entirely sure but I wonder if Starmer will go willingly and it’s pretty hard to get rid of a Labour prime minister given that.
I’m guessing that if Starmer goes or is pushed, it won’t happen until after the May local elections as whoever wants to succeed him won’t want to carry that particular can.
As ever with politics, the substance, the reality, is much less important than the meaning that people invest in it.
In that regard and in many others, Powell changes nothing.
Along with the rest of our fearless media of course.
I’m sure GBNews is on the case.
I completely agree, but they shape how many people see things and unfortunately shapes how the government acts.
I don’t think Starmer is someone you can reshape along your favoured lines, & I speak as one who dearly wises him to be different. I don’t see a Powell victory changing him much if at all, but it will create more fevered speculation about his leadership. It’s a dagger that wounds but cannnot kill.
Whatever members’ intentions her victory which seems pretty inevitable will be interpreted by the party’s enemies as a huge vote of no confidence in Starmer and will create another round of speculation in his leadership without actually ending it or even changing the govt’s direction much.
by Steven Fielding — Reposted by Tim Bale
But more seriously if you want Starmer gone then you should be honest with yourself & take a more direct route. A Powell victory will just made a bad situation just that bit worse without achieving your ends.
Given Cuomo’s record with women, this is a bold move.
Reposted by Steven Fielding
Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, who has sought to paint Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani as an extremist, has homed in on questions about his stance on prostitution. Mamdani has stressed that he has never supported legalization and called Cuomo’s comments smears.
Cuomo Tries to Make Prostitution an Issue in NYC Mayor’s Race
Former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has criticized Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani over his past support for decriminalizing prostitution. Mr. Mamdani’s campaign has not emphasized the issue.
nyti.ms
Reposted by Steven Fielding
Starmer regarding Reform’s former leader in Wales, Nathan Gill: “The member for Clacton & his deputy worked alongside someone who took money to spread Putin’s propaganda. They have serious questions to answer about what they knew”
#PMQs #PoliticsLive
#PMQs #PoliticsLive
Although in his latter stages as labour leader he was generally regarded as having strangulated himself to appear respectable. Like lots of other politicians once freed of responsibility, he started to talk more authentically.
There that is - it called thermometer theory - which suggests that public opinion moves away from a government the longer it is in power and towards whatever the opposition happens to be saying? That implies there is no ultimate shift but opinions merely oscillate. I’m not sure that helps!
I don;t know about the public but Labour members - who of course are subject to some churn over time - became less supportive of nationalisation between Kinnock's and Blair's leadership - according to Seyd and Whiteley surveys.
If this kind of commentariat is an avatar for their readers, it’s no wonder we are in the mess we are in.
I appreciate they live an elevated lifestyle, but how they could be so oblivious to the lives of the majority I just don’t know. They must be incredibly selfish, ignorant, or in other ways sociopathic/solipsistic.
Yes, it sounds virtuous and I’m sure there are people with ‘aspirations’ that are but essentially it hides greed for those that don’t need anymore.
It’s a Times columnist: they seem to imagine that everybody is on about £100k or so when the average household income is about £35k. What world do they live in?