If Labour's plans are so breathtakingly daring and radical, then why do people STILL say, by a margin of 65% to 20%, that Miliband "hasn't made it clear what he stands for"?

 

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/docu...ults-071114.pdf

 

Or is this another issue on which people in the constituency you're canvassing in mysteriously have polar-opposite views to everyone else in the country?

Because Ed's bloody terrible at PR and announces policies at a setpiece speech before barely mentioning them again. I've said this to you a million bloody times Danny - just because people don't remember/never hear most of the stuff Ed has come out with doesn't make it 'not radical' compared to what has come before.

Meanwhile, you proceed to define a Labour policy as existing based on whether or not it's been mentioned in the last month, hold up Andy 'foundation hospitals' Burnham as the saviour of the left-wing, and just generally act as if Ed Miliband is essentially Margaret Thatcher reincarnate but minus the handbag and the backbone. Do you view politics solely through the prism of rhetoric?

 

No I don't. Thatcher increased NHS spending more than Miliband plans to (and yet, in yet another sign of the left's Stockholm syndrome, the pathetic, inadequate increase that Miliband plans is also hailed as "radical").

At this stage Danny, you legitimately baffle me. You hold up the 1997 manifesto and Cameron's speech as examples of things more left wing than Ed Miliband, just because the two Eds agree that the deficit is something that should be closed by the end of the next parliament - without saying whether that will come through taxes or spending cuts, but likely a mixture of the two, because frankly it isn't 'left-wing' that we're spending more on interest than on schools, and it's quite nice to be able to govern without the threat of speculative attacks from people pissed off that you aren't paying them back. (By the way, check that 1997 manifesto - you might have forgotten it had a commitment to Conservative spending plans until 1999 in there)

 

Conservative spending plans that indicated (modest) increases to spending, NOT massive cuts.

No I don't. Thatcher increased NHS spending more than Miliband plans to (and yet, in yet another sign of the left's Stockholm syndrome, the pathetic, inadequate increase that Miliband plans is also hailed as "radical").

Has anybody really said that the NHS Time To Care policy totalling up to £2.5bn is radical?! I'm going to start needing a Johann Hari-esque referencing policy from now on because seriously.

 

(LMFAO at your implication that ED MILIBAND IS MORE RIGHT WING THAN MARGARET THATCHER.)

Given how reliably the public gets everything wrong ( http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-...ws-8697821.html ) it's a wonder that as high as 20% think Ed has a lot of clear policy by now.

Blair inherited a Thatcherite world and chose to continue along those lines, albeit spending more and more and more in a PC groove (and bureacratic groove). There was nothing much left-wing about New Labour, they moved deliberately to target the same voter-base as The Right.

 

Left-wing policies are also not that much in evidence in any significant way from any party right now, because they require cash that isn't available. Blair and brown may have had good intentions, but if you bankrupt the country it's counter-productive, and that's the new political reality for the forseeable future. All political decisions will be based on (lack of) money. Infrastructure projects would create jobs and be a long-term investment, if they weren't all eggs-in-one-bloody-expensive 20-minute-train-journey-savings lack of imagination. The long-term costs would be recouped.

 

What would I vote for?

 

Ending Right To Buy, building more Council houses, ending NIMBYISM rights and espensive rents to private landlords by virtue of having council housing. Without the buy-to-let market house prices would be more realistic.

 

Tax second-home ownership heavily.

 

Get the long-term unemployed trained up for work. If they choose not to work, reduce the benefits.

 

More investment in wind and solar power. We live on a windy island. It's good for the planet.

 

Mental health investment. People are dying ignored.

 

tax the rich, close investment loopholes that non-UK citizens take advantage of. The rich have not suffered over the last 8 years, the rest of the country has. Time they contributed to help OUR society recover to remain healthy.

 

just a few to start with.

 

 

If Blair and Brown bankrupted the country then christ knows what Osborne is doing.

 

This apparently could save the average household more than double what the energy price freeze will. And makes more long term sense.

 

http://labourlist.org/2014/11/an-end-to-cold-homes/

My pet favourite Keynesian policy c. 2009 was the insulation of every building in the country, so THAT'LL DO PAM *.*

 

*cue Danny claiming it isn't actually policy for whatever reason*

My pet favourite Keynesian policy c. 2009 was the insulation of every building in the country, so THAT'LL DO PAM *.*

 

*cue Danny claiming it isn't actually policy for whatever reason*

It's one of the most obvious examples of the principle of stopping the problem at the cause rather than handing people money when it screws them over.

 

I'm just enjoying the irony that it's Caroline Flint's department which is one of those with some of our most notably interventionist policy.

If Blair and Brown bankrupted the country then christ knows what Osborne is doing.

 

This apparently could save the average household more than double what the energy price freeze will. And makes more long term sense.

 

http://labourlist.org/2014/11/an-end-to-cold-homes/

 

there's already much available, and has been for a long time:

 

https://www.britishgas.co.uk/energy-saving-...-and-conditions

 

depends on the age of the home, really and what's needed. For a start it would make more sense to force landlords to provide efficient, warm homes for tenants, that would stuff the cowboys and save the taxpayer money and save the (usually poor) tenants fuel bills. Much better than spending money up front, use the money direct and let tenants be the ones who complain. Councils already are providing "green" homes (all new ones, and converting older ones). People who can afford to do the works have probably already done it, and it's likely the older poorer home-owners that need targeting.

Emily Thornberry has resigned from the Labour front bench after her Tweet earlier.

 

Well, that escalated quickly.

So let's get this right. A Home Secretary who has so far appointed two people to lead an enquiry who have subsequently been forced to resign still has her job. The Secretary of State at the DWP who has presided over a shambolic "reform" of the benefits system still has his job. A Chancellor who promised in his first Budget to eliminate the deficit by the end of this Parliament but who has now postponed that target date until around 2019 still has his job. But a member of the Shadow Cabinet (who received the same salary as a backbench MP) who tweeted a photograph has quit her job.

Miliband is just so gutless. Given how the dreary "on-message" automatons are killing the party, he should be happy one finally showed some personality.

 

This is yet another example to feed the image of him as being someone easy to push around and dominate. "If he can't even stand up to the press, how's he going to stand up to Putin?"

Miliband is just so gutless. Given how the dreary "on-message" automatons are killing the party, he should be happy one finally showed some personality.

There was me thinking you were going to be laying into her as one of the 'out of touch bubble elite'...

There was me thinking you were going to be laying into her as one of the 'out of touch bubble elite'...

 

I would probably laugh at someone who had about 4 St George's flags on their door, in the same way I would if someone had really gaudy, flashing Christmas lights </metropolitansnob>

Edited November 21, 201410 yr by Danny

It was a dumb thing to do at an election time, but it's a slap on the wrist matter. Watched Question Time for the first time in ages (I just get too exasperated with the panellists most of the time) thought there were two good panellists, and they weren't Ken Clarke, Taxpayer alliance or UKIP propagandists. Andy Burnham would make a good leader....

Miliband is just so gutless. Given how the dreary "on-message" automatons are killing the party, he should be happy one finally showed some personality.

 

This is yet another example to feed the image of him as being someone easy to push around and dominate. "If he can't even stand up to the press, how's he going to stand up to Putin?"

Not in the slightest. It was a completely stupid thing to do at a completely stupid time and he needed to act quickly.

Not in the slightest. It was a completely stupid thing to do at a completely stupid time and he needed to act quickly.

 

 

Indeed end the story now, she wasnt a Millibandite anyway!

 

In relation to Burnham, yeh a great politican pity hes a blue though!

'White Van Dan' has written his 'Danifesto' in The Sun, his 'no-nonsense plan for sorting Britain out'.

 

Welfare state: Work for four years after you leave school before you can claim benefits.

 

Immigration: Copy the Aussies. If people show up uninvited, send them back.

 

Transport: Public transport costs are too high. More investment in roads too.

 

Education: Better discipline. Kids are too mouthy now, not like when we had the cane.

 

Justice: Tougher sentences for murderers. And jail those who burn the poppy.

 

Taxes: A killer for self-employed people like me. Start-ups need more breaks.

Ashcroft poll of (mainly) Lib Dem seats puts them on 31% in Sheffield Hallam over Labour's 28%. When it's not weighted for 2010 vote (and to be honest why would you when it shows Labour taking nearly as many 2010 Lib Dem votes as the Lib Dems) it goes to 32% Labour and 26% Lib Dem.

 

Game on.