|
Feb 2020
9:59am, 6 Feb 2020
4,255 posts
|
Raemond
To be fair, this week's shitness is more personalised than general I think, though the adjustment to the new world order and preparations for the future relationship stuff is keeping us all very much on our toes.
Much as I wish it weren't so, I suspect Starmer (being a chap, and a Sir,m and having a name with a vague ring of empire) might have a better chance of winning back the sorts who've 'loaned' their votes to the tories for now. Not that it'll be too much of an issue for the next little while. The odd by-election here and there may whittle down the majority a bit, but by the time the next GE rolls around I'm sure the broader implications of brexit will have manifested themselves and it should be the opposition's to lose.
|
|
Feb 2020
10:30am, 6 Feb 2020
6,309 posts
|
jda
I think you may be altogether too optimistic regarding the obviousness of the problems and the likelihood of the population reacting accordingly. Don't forget a majority of the over-65 brexiters actually said they wanted brexit even if their own children lost jobs as a result. Many problems can be denied or deflected (but diesel). And the EU will be blamed for any bad outcomes that cannot be denied.
The generation growing up without Erasmus, without freedom of movement, etc, might not really know what they are missing. After all, austerity has been pretty shit for a lot of people for a long time now, and they still thought the appropriate response to 10 years of tory rule was....more tory rule.
|
|
Feb 2020
10:40am, 6 Feb 2020
9,517 posts
|
rf_fozzy
I've been thinking about the psychology of the remain/leave debate and the subtle, yet clear shifts in position due to the external politics of the various camps.
So, during the referendum campaign (and before), the 'leavers' were very much on the attack and the 'remainers' very much on the defensive. For obvious reasons - those that wanted to leave the EU had nothing to defend (hence why it was easy to make open "promises" that could easily be debunked) and in part due to strategy, hence the failure to crystallise around a single plan. Whereas the lack of a plan gave the remain camp nothing to tear down and get their teeth into, whilst having to defend policy decisions spanning 40 years (which they did badly) and led to the "project fear" style campaign (e.g. house prices are going to crash).
After the vote, during the WA phase everything was still up for grabs (people's vote, 2nd ref, etc etc) and so both sides definitely were on the attack. Thus the extreme polarisation and remarkable lack of shift of any public opinion and the vitriol on both sides - as partisan positioning was more important than a rational appraisal of the facts
Now, we've entered a new phase, Brexiters have all the power, but are now very much on the defensive - you have to now start owning your decisions and the lies will start to come home to roost. Which changes the dynamic of the whole situation.
Will we become less polarised as a nation/nations? Difficult to say, but I would suggest in the next 2 years we'll start to see some significant shifts in public opinion. Perhaps quicker depending on what the trade talks end up looking like and when the trade offs and cost-benefit ratio becomes clearer.
Interesting times ahead.
|
|
Feb 2020
10:47am, 6 Feb 2020
23,032 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
I think they will be on the defensive now for sure and the lies and incompetence will become evident. I'm not totally sure it will change the minds of Leavers, but if the economy starts going south I suspect it might. If the US economy weren't holding up under Trump I suspect he might be on shaker ground than he is at present. As things stand I can see him getting 4 more years as the Dems seem to be a shower - for which see the routed and divided opposition over here.
Basically things need to go very badly for the Tories if Labour expect to get in again. It's not a question of how they fuck things up - I believe they will - but how badly.
|
|
Feb 2020
10:53am, 6 Feb 2020
2,452 posts
|
Fellrunning
As I've said before. Boris could be caught live on camera drowning a sack of kittens on the Serpentine call an election that afternoon and still get elected.
|
|
Feb 2020
11:06am, 6 Feb 2020
9,519 posts
|
rf_fozzy
"I think they will be on the defensive now for sure and the lies and incompetence will become evident. I'm not totally sure it will change the minds of Leavers, but if the economy starts going south I suspect it might."
So, I don't even think it will take a dodgy economy (although I agree that nothing changes minds faster than the amount of money in their pocket - although then again as you say 10 years of Austerity so let's vote for more of them the same but worse...), it's more shift of to the defensive position that will change minds.
To my mind, if you are on the attack in politics (whatever the situation), you are looking to change minds. So for example, let's take extinction rebellion - they went on the "attack" with their protests to change minds about how serious the climate emergency was. Now you may not like their tactics, but the outcome was effective - more people now believe that the climate is an urgent problem than even 2/3 years ago and *politically* it's achieved more than the weight of scientific evidence that overwhelmingly supports their view. So we see even the Tories having to shift position and for example bring forward the ban on sales of new petrol/diesel cars (which btw will be pretty much gone by 2035 anyway....)
If you're on the defensive, however, you're not looking to change minds, you're looking to keep the support you have. So, let's take Trump - you're quite right the US economy is somewhat ok (although there are signs that it's starting to wobble as his tax cuts created a bit of a bubble) and so those people who voted for him don't yet have to challenge *themselves* and say Hmm I think I got it wrong. (more about this below). However, in general, it's impossible to defend everything you've done (so again Trump is facing a tight re-election fight and pretty much any other president with the economy he's got would be cruising it), and so you do lose support in dribs and drabs. E.g. Blair's govts got progressively less big majorities over time.
Now, I am not saying that all Brexiters are suddenly going to become 'Rejoiners' (how ever much that might be my personal preference), and if all the Brexiter promises are kept (inc £350m a week etc) and everything is sunlit uplands and cake and eating it and oven ready deals, then of course we might see a different picture. But, my hypothesis is that the Brexit Referendum was the peak of the (political) attack and it persuaded 52% of the population overall, and that's the high water mark. Because of the protracted WA phase, that 52% was sustained (both sides on the attack, keeping partisan support, still want to 'beat' the other side), but now that "Leave" has "won" (i.e. they currently run the govt), they have no-one to attack apart from themselves and slowly but surely that 52% will start to decrease. We'll see.
|
|
Feb 2020
11:14am, 6 Feb 2020
27,249 posts
|
macca 53
The “crunch” around here should come when Nissan announce the closure of their Sunderland plant, although there’s been a bit of sparring between them and the fake news team so there’s *probably* “discussions” going on in the background.
|
|
Feb 2020
11:19am, 6 Feb 2020
9,520 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Right re: Trump and the democrats.
A couple of things. At the moment Trump isn't running against any particular candidate, so he's generally lashing out at everyone. This might help his extreme partisan support, but pushes away the independent voters he needs to win the election (which is why he did some interesting things in his SotU address on Tues).
When he has an opponent, this both strengthens and weakens him because the US voters have a clear view of the alternative, rather than a diffuse one. But he has someone to attack.
But his overall chances are no better than 50:50 (which is pretty low for a sitting president) because of the way he's not interested in reaching out to independents, moderates and various demographic groups and instead doubles down on the support that got him there.
Will this work? I don't know, but as I've said above, although the economy is v important, there are other things that are important too. E.g. the treatment of immigrants and the role of ICE. It's how these balance off against each other.
Re: Sh!tshow - yes and no. Iowa Caucus results being screwed up wasn't a great look, but in the end that won't hurt them much I don't think. Especially when new narratives come along. And whichever candidate gets nominated, I think you'll see a broad coalescence around that candidate. Similar to the way that the Republicans coalesced around trump and the Tories around Boris (note Nicky Morgan won't serve in a Boris govt quote. Fastforward 8months and she has a peerage from Boris and is in the cabinet...)
|
|
Feb 2020
11:21am, 6 Feb 2020
9,521 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Macca - yes, that's the sort of situation/news that I'm talking about re:defensive posture.
Before the election, because both sides on the attack it was the "uncertainty" that was the problem.
Now it can't be - it has to be the policy decisions of the Tory govt in power to blame. So they are forced onto the defensive.
With a better Lab leader who is willing to go on the offensive, this is the sort of position that cannot win a single vote, but can lose thousands.
|
|
Feb 2020
11:22am, 6 Feb 2020
8,384 posts
|
simbil
EU membership is a big emotive subject, it will take something big and emotive to change any minds at significant scale. No amount of charts and figures will do it.
I don't think we will see the kind of economic depression that would touch everyone's lives in a stark enough manner, it will just be less growth than we would of otherwise had and some businesses relocating, but not enough at once to make it feel like a crisis.
Something else might come along that crystalises the issue in an emotive manner, or lots of smaller things all coming together at once.
|
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
