RE: Low end21 Nov 2024 11:52
MaryB-"Grezz - isn't Reeves wonderful? Isn't Liebour wonderful? Kier for King.
NICer rise and screw the farmers. What could go wrong?
We need the Lettuce back :)"
Well, I think we all knew it was a foregone conclusion that Labour would win the election, but the scale was quite a shock. It's clear that many adopted the 'bi-election' strategy and set out to teach the Conservatives a lesson, without considering the consequences. Of all the potential candidates for the front bench positions, from several pieces that I read, I actually expected Rachel Reeves to be measured and reasonable. With her 'background' in economics, I expected the economy to be quite well managed. However, as we now know, she lied. She lied on her CV with regard to her experience and she lied about her philosophy with respect to fiscal good-governance. In practice, she's adopted policies akin to 'O' level socialist economics, which has been consistently proven to be damaging for growth and prosperity. Then with Rayner as Deputy PM and Lammy as Foreign Secretary, we have evidence that Starmer is absolutely the idealistic, power-hungry snake that most of us always suspected. I find it difficult to even watch the a-hole speak on TV...
However, as things stand, with so many sectors of society affected by both their financial raids and their general ineptitude (think immigration and crime), it seems very likely indeed we are dealing with a one-term government. I'm taking, the perhaps overly optimistic view, that in about four and a half years, we'll vote in a centre-right government, who will adopt some policies which will grow the economy and and correct the wrongs inflicted on the British mainstream and the pandering to the woke and the Islington idealists will be consigned back to the closet. Fingers crossed..