• Welcome to PASOTI (Sponsored by GA Solictors and Lang & Potter)
  • Hello guests - don't forget that by registering and signing up for Pasoti you'll see less adverts plus receive extras like free match tickets, taking part in polls, joining in the chat room and more. Come and join us!

I think Labour has got it wrong

Daz

Administrator
Staff member
Pasoti Donor
Sep 30, 2003
2,670
237
42
Exactly what I just said except that on competence it’s a bit more than 10% difference.

Thanks for showing this though, you clearly haven’t found it meaningless.
Can you read the figures?

I’ll help you out. There is a 12% difference in the first question.
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
How dare you tell others what they think and what they don’t think! Opinions are based on what people see and hear, be it on the news, internet or elsewhere. You have based plenty or your opinions on opinion polls, which are by definition other peoples opinions.

Blair introduced the privatisation of the NHS and went to war to suck up to the yanks, sounds very Tory to me, but I read that so it’s obviously not my opinion and therefore not valid.
I didn’t tell anyone what they think. I asked emu what he thought were the reasons Blair was like the tories. He showed a graph that had Blair to be more of a fascist than Thatcher and on another graph by the same person near to Hitler. If that’s what his opinion is based on , I apologise

On your points I was really disappointed by PFI and the Iraq War and agree these were Tory like policies. NHS privatisation is something that is still high up on the Tory wish list.

However for me that was more than outweighed by the investment in schools and hospitals, the minimum wage, sure start, increasing NHS investment in real terms every year, slashing homelessness and child property. All the things that the tories voted against in Parliament.
 

Daz

Administrator
Staff member
Pasoti Donor
Sep 30, 2003
2,670
237
42
You’re right 12% not 10% , I only skimmed over the figures last night cos some bloke told me they were meaningless.
They are meaningless, but I do like them to be quoted correctly rather than to suit someone’s agenda.
 
  • GreenArmy
Reactions: Emu
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
Meaningless- definition- having a purpose or reason. It is by definition not meaningless. It is a snapshot of how people reacted to the speech last night. Is it an “agenda” to say a poll is meaningless when it’s not because you don’t like what it says? Yes.

Anyway back on topic the most disappointing aspect for me was the absence of any mention of votal reform. Nearly every country in Europe has PR and having a Government with total power, Labour or Conservative, has got to end. 80% of Labour members want this but couldn’t get a majority because of the Unions. Another challenge for Starmer.

However looking at Chesham and Batley it looks like informal alliances will be struck with some candidates standing down where they can’t win .
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
Again you say something then claim you don't.
Jeez Green Thing do keep up mate, Emu said he couldn’t be arsed to tell us what he thought, the graph with arbitrary points on it showing Blair was more of a fascist than Thatcher wasn’t what Emu thought it was someone else’s graph .

An opinion is conclusions arrived at from evidence . I wanted to know what he thought, how he arrived at the opinion that the graph showed the Blair government was just like the Tories and whether he thought the evidence is credible.

But again you’re back to obsessing about me rather than the topic.
 

GreenThing

Administrator
Staff member
Lowey Sponsor
NHS Volunteer Supporter
Pasoti Donor
Sep 13, 2003
3,933
297
Plymouth
I'm not obsessing, just pointing out your contradictions. I, like others would like to get involved in discussing issues with a few other people on here but then up you pop and turn it into the MKF show, backtacking, likening people to a 5 year old child, telling people to post on-topic when something veers off slightly after 20 odd pages, telling people that their opinions aren't valid because they read it somewhere. You claim you never said any of this when it's there in black and white. You don't appear to want a discussion, you see it as a game where you want to be the winner.

Emu posts an opinion and you tell him that it's not his opinion, KeithB posts an opinion and you tell him he should be posting elsewhere. I'll put it to the other mods that we re-name this forum 'MKF Forum', enjoy it.
 
Last edited:
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
I'm not obsessing, just pointing out your contradictions. I, like others would like to get involved in discussing issues with a few other people on here but then up you pop and turn it into the MKF show, backtacking, likening people to a 5 year old child, telling people to post on-topic when something veers off slightly after 20 odd pages, telling people that their opinions aren't valid because they read it somewhere. You claim you never said any of this when it's there in black and white. You don't appear to want a discussion, you see it as a game where you want to be the winner. I'll put it to the other mods that we re-name this forum 'MKF Forum', enjoy it.
meltdown none of which is true but I can take it, would rather we stick to the topic than talking about me tho
 
Apr 15, 2004
2,876
138
East Devon
Can someone bring me up to speed with this silly spat about polls please? It's just I must have missed something (and I can't be bothered going back too far) I was under the impression mkf said Starmer's speech was well received according to initial polls .... then someone says that's rubbish and polls can't be trusted.....then (this is where I start to get lost) Daz quotes the poll that actually backs up what mkf was saying..... then mkf slightly misquotes a figure in said poll understating how well Starmer did ...... then he's attacked for not being able to read figures and misrepresenting .....Errrr......

Then in parallel (I think) someone arguing Blair was more right wing than the Tories links an opinion piece from NZ with a plot that I see only goes up to 2008 but appears to show Labour during Blair's time to the left of Tories (apart from Ted Heath's time). .... Errrrr.....

Ahhh - Don't bother.
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
Can someone bring me up to speed with this silly spat about polls please? It's just I must have missed something (and I can't be bothered going back too far) I was under the impression mkf said Starmer's speech was well received according to initial polls .... then someone says that's rubbish and polls can't be trusted.....then (this is where I start to get lost) Daz quotes the poll that actually backs up what mkf was saying..... then mkf slightly misquotes a figure in said poll understating how well Starmer did ...... then he's attacked for not being able to read figures and misrepresenting .....Errrr......

Then in parallel (I think) someone arguing Blair was more right wing than the Tories links an opinion piece from NZ with a plot that I see only goes up to 2008 but appears to show Labour during Blair's time to the left of Tories (apart from Ted Heath's time). .... Errrrr.....

Ahhh - Don't bother.
I'll sum it up in one sentence mate, Starmer's speech went down well with the public and some people are seething :mad:
 
Jul 15, 2006
3,890
55
Kenton, Devon
I do have some sympathy with those who call Tony Blair's Goverment "Tory-lite" or similar: I don't agree with the label, but I can see why they say it. Yes, he moved away from the traditional socialist model of Labour, but that was because he could see the UK had changed - the Conservatives had changed - during the 80s: traditional Labour voters suddenly had a chance to buy their council homes (that was, in the long term, a bad move IMHO as we now have a chronic shortage of council properties, but that's where we are) and be home owners. Thatcherism encouraged people to have debt, so suddenly these working class people had colour TVs and their own car, all of which was because they could get loans. Many traditional Labour voters started to not consider themselves as working class ... and Labour had to move with them.

This goes back to what I've said several times before - Labour has to re-invent themselves to remain relevant to the people they are supposed to represent: this is something which the Conservatives have proved time and again to be very good at. Labour has to stop thinking that we're in the 1970s (although, given how things are at the moment, it's easy not to feel like it is back there) and fighting those battles. Yes, there is still a massive issue with the lowest paid who feel alienated, that we still have an issue with child poverty (and more children are being dragged back into that bracket), but many people have different concerns: different needs - the environment, green spaces, pollution. The far left of the party just don't seem to understand this.

This is why I agree with the direction Sir Kier is trying to take Labour, to a more centralist-left position. Whether he's the right person for that is a matter for further debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Biggs and Mike E

Daz

Administrator
Staff member
Pasoti Donor
Sep 30, 2003
2,670
237
42
I'll sum it up in one sentence mate, Starmer's speech went down well with the public and some people are seething :mad:
No, Starmer’s speech went down well with those polled. I pointed to the fact that polls are meaningless as they don’t seem to have any bearing on elections. Boris’ results were not as good, yet he still smashed Labour in the election. It’s not that difficult to grasp for you or ‘Ave it.
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
Polls are not supposed to indicate who is going to win an election , they are a snapshot of how people feel about something at a given time. You just explained the meaning of it , how it went down well, and then again called it meaningless . Ridiculous, and not that difficult to grasp.