Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Spoonman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 2:59 pm For his faults, I would still be willing to sit down and listen to Ed Milliband for his take on certain political matters compared to a different certain ex-Labour leader given that he has some important experience that could be useful in a potential Starmer-led government in the future, plus that he accepts that he screwed up in 2015 and didn't try to wriggle out of that, unlike certain fellow travellers of the other one I mentioned giving excuses like "we won the argument" - Milliband actually wanted his Labour party to be a party of government.

Then again, I'm not a member.

As a man I find Ed Miliband amiable, this isn't personal. As a politician, he has talent and I believe his intentions are good.
But as LOTO he was inept: the wrong person, in the wrong job, at the wrong time.
The litmus test is, as LOTO, he had one job, to deliver a Labour government. He failed.

Oboogie wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 3:32 pm

Spoonman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 2:59 pm For his faults, I would still be willing to sit down and listen to Ed Milliband for his take on certain political matters compared to a different certain ex-Labour leader given that he has some important experience that could be useful in a potential Starmer-led government in the future, plus that he accepts that he screwed up in 2015 and didn't try to wriggle out of that, unlike certain fellow travellers of the other one I mentioned giving excuses like "we won the argument" - Milliband actually wanted his Labour party to be a party of government.

Then again, I'm not a member.

As a man I find Ed Miliband amiable, this isn't personal. As a politician, he has talent and I believe his intentions are good.
But as LOTO he was inept: the wrong person, in the wrong job, at the wrong time.
The litmus test is, as LOTO, he had one job, to deliver a Labour government. He failed.

Indeed, that's a fair comment.

Youngian wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 2:09 pm The Tories have tried some new populist hats; anti net zero, statues, woke bank accounts etc but it’s all just wiffle with no traction beyond its own looney base. So now they’ve fallen back into their Thatcherite comfort zone of tax cuts and prudent house keeping (too fucking late for that). Yes, it’s the economy, stupid.

And that's very likely why Braverman got the boot. The Cenotaph riot showed who these policies were appealing to - the very ugly and real far right. And they're just as appalling and toxic to the traditional Tory voters as a sudden influx of Albanian pimps taking over their cul-de-sac and filling it with Syrian prostitutes and social workers.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 4:09 pm And that's very likely why Braverman got the boot. The Cenotaph riot showed who these policies were appealing to - the very ugly and real far right.

I think the key part here is ‘showing’. The Tories don’t care if their policies appeal to thugs and bigots. In fact, I suspect they somewhat rely on it and many of them share similar views, albeit more politely expressed. What they do care about is this being exposed and undeniable.

Braverman made the link explicit because she’s too stupid and too self-important to care, and thinks these bigots can propel her into No. 10. I’m certain however that being seen to be very much on the same team as Yaxley-Lennon and chums made some Tories very uncomfortable - and deservedly so.

Much like the never-Trump Republican faction, it's an issue of presentation, not content.