Spyke
fedia.io

Gary called it and is hopeful that we might get wealth taxes (video). Let's hope that Labour won't be absolute tits on the issue.

22

I bet this headline hits VERY different to anyone who hasn't paid attention for the last couple/few years to know about Reform the party.

Without that context, he kinda sounds like a villain from a 1930s play 😄

12
milkisklimreply
lemmy.world

There was a cult in the American sitcom Parks and Rec called the reasonablists. They were named as such because if you disagreed with them, that would make you seem unreasonable. I feel Reform is a similar trap.

12
feddit.uk

The name of Reform has always made me think of this too! You may as well call your party Nice Things. "Do you stand against Nice Things." "See this is why we don't have Nice Things."

10
Monzcarroreply
feddit.uk

I heard someone pronounce it RE-form, the way you'd say reformed ham. This is now my preferred pronunciation for the reasons above.

2

What does RE-FORM stand for anyway?

Is it:
Racists
Economic Fraudsters
Oligarchs
Rapists
Morons

or

Raping
England
For
Oligarch's
Russian
Money

or

Robbing
England's
Future
Over
Rape
Movies

or

Ruining
Earth's
Future
Over
Risky
Money

or other?

2

Tactical voting, if continued by the left, is going to pull the Overton window strongly leftwards, and will ensure right wing parties have an extremely difficult time getting into power

2
lemmy.world

So much mega-important, world changing shit going on and we have this media stoked in-fighting nonsense going on.

Fucking politics man.

-19
Apepollo11reply
lemmy.world

Got to echo this.

Unlike the low-stakes infighting nonsense that we often have, this is really important.

Multiple polls have shown that not only is Andy Burnham much more popular than Starmer (big surprise, who isn't?), but that he's more popular than Farage. And that is a big deal, because almost nobody else is.

He's an attractive choice for the left, and he's attractive for Northerners who want change - two camps which Starmer has well and truly lost.

14
Apepollo11reply
lemmy.world

I meant the general population, really.

I live in a place where, realistically, the next MP is going to be Labour or Reform. I'm a member of the Green Party, but I'd vote Labour if Burnham was leading it. I wouldn't at the moment.

2
feddit.uk

Not really... but I bet there's quite a lot who'll simply follow the current party line, so if the Labour leader were to steer things leftwards towards the centre (or ideally past it), many of them would follow it.

1
feddit.uk

Starmer stood for Labour leadership on a considerably lefter platform than the vague stuff Burnham's been saying. Burnham as PM isn't going to change Labour's current policies. He might be better at campaigning. When people realise that nothing's going to change, helped by the rightwing press, they'll turn on him too.

3

The difference is that he's got form.

I, like most people here (Manchester), voted against having a mayor in the first place. When the Tories made the position anyway, I voted against Andy Burnham.

But he's absolutely won me over. In the time he's been mayor, directly because of his policies, Manchester has improved dramatically.

Starmer promised a lot, but Burnham has actually delivered change already.

1

No of course not.

It just seems like their time could be better spent dealing with problems instead of infighting. Then maybe the deluded fools who've fallen for the Farage con would wake up.

But that's wishful thinking. I'm old enough and cynical enough to see how little really changes. The rich still get richer with the rest fighting over an ever shrinking slice of the pie while politicians tinker around the edges.

1

This is getting reported much more than the other by-elections that happened specifically because this one is quite likely to bring about a significant change in the UK's national politics

7

You reached the end