Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[bovril]

I think the Tories' success is a lot down to the fact we have moved to a kind of 2-tribe electorate like in the US, but one side is almost totally hoovered up by one party, and the other votes for various parties - Labour, Greens, SNP, LD. Johnson has helped that but I don't think Brand Boris is a real thing. If people vote for him solely based on his brand then we truly are ****ed. 

[foxile5]

25 minutes ago, bovril said:

I think the Tories' success is a lot down to the fact we have moved to a kind of 2-tribe electorate like in the US... If people vote for him solely based on his brand then we truly are ****ed. 

One implies the other. As a society we've been aping America quite a bit this last decade but, bafflingly, only the shit parts. 

 

Over the next decade expect - 

 

Privatised health care and 'insurance' model. 

Massive rise in homelessness. 

Increased litigation. 

Universities splitting courses into component fragments. Charging more. 

[Kopfkino]

32 minutes ago, bovril said:

I think the Tories' success is a lot down to the fact we have moved to a kind of 2-tribe electorate like in the US, but one side is almost totally hoovered up by one party, and the other votes for various parties - Labour, Greens, SNP, LD. Johnson has helped that but I don't think Brand Boris is a real thing. If people vote for him solely based on his brand then we truly are ****ed. 

Or it might just be that the main alternative is crap at putting forward a candidate for prime minister and makes its own internal battles for purity more important than winning elections. I mean, Blair won 2 huge landslides and had a third dominant showing at the Lib Dem’s peak. People weren’t making half-baked excuses then cos they weren’t needed cos they actually put forward someone relatively likeable, electable and had a platform with broad appeal backed by a positive campaign.

[Corky]

He managed to get a huge majority beating Corbyn who was loathed. He's still crap.

 

Like Rob Kelly being voted a better manager than Peter Taylor.

[BenTheFox]

2 hours ago, Unabomber said:

He’s an absolute idiot! Folk are just voting Tory not brand Boris. 

Hmm I'm not so sure. The fact that people call him by his first name tells you all you need to know. People mistake his bumbling manner as some sort of charm or charisma and people eat it up. He's certainly not an idiot, he was a grubby journalist who has played the game to get to where he is. 

[BenTheFox]

1 hour ago, Corky said:

He managed to get a huge majority beating Corbyn who was loathed. He's still crap.

 

Like Rob Kelly being voted a better manager than Peter Taylor.

However, Theresa May before him didn't get a huge majority against the same person. There were two significant differences being the two elections; one being the change in tory leadership and the other being Labour's stance on a second referendum. Was the outcome so significantly different because Johnson was deemed better than May or that Labour's stance on a second referendum was very unpopular? I suspect a little from column A, a little from column B. 

[peach0000]

1 hour ago, Corky said:

He managed to get a huge majority beating Corbyn who was loathed. He's still crap.

 

Like Rob Kelly being voted a better manager than Peter Taylor.

I always think people are too quick to dismiss Corbyn. He still has a lot of support and a lot of people voted for him. Saying he was loathed is writing off a third of the population and a majority of the younger generation.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

3 hours ago, sdb said:

As someone who appears to be a big Mr Johnson fan from what I've seen you post/tweet, what is it about that brand that you find appealing? Genuine question.  

 

3 hours ago, Unabomber said:

Big Mr Johnson fan? Surely not

I'm not a big fan of any politician really.

Was just highlighting why people find him accessible through the Boris Brand.

I understand why people like him and I understand why people don't like him, exactly the same with someone like Corbyn.

[ozleicester]

4 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

 

He's done pretty well creating that brand then (regardless whether you like him or not) and that brand has helped him win twice in London (not a Tory heartland overall), the Tory leadership and a whopping majority as Prime Minister.

A lot of people clearly like him and buy into Brand Boris.

A lot of people like Coke, Marlboro, McDonalds, and Man Utd.

[BenTheFox]

4 minutes ago, peach0000 said:

I always think people are too quick to dismiss Corbyn. He still has a lot of support and a lot of people voted for him. Saying he was loathed is writing off a third of the population and a majority of the younger generation.

As I mentioned in a previous post, one of the big reasons why Labour lost a number of votes in 2019 is due to their change of position over a people's vote, which clearly wasn't down to Corbyn. 

[Dunge]

I remember during the Conservative leadership contest there was some analysis done on the likely election outcomes of the different candidates, and there’s no doubt that Boris gave them the best result in the stats. I remember the worst one being Rory Stewart, which interested me. He came across as the most intelligent candidate, the most out-reaching, progressive and easily the one most palatable to “the left”. I liked him too, at least comparatively. However, there was one massive problem: Brexit. People on the left wouldn’t have abandoned their own party of choice for him, and because of his stance on Brexit the provincial vote would have gone to Farage. The Tories would have been blitzed.

 

But Boris coming top was also interesting, given he was up against the likes of Gove and Raab, who were also Brexiters. Now, I haven’t a lot of time for Raab and think he’s been vastly overrated by his party, but Gove is clever. He is, however, charmless. And whatever you say about Boris, he has charisma and he has charm. That’s not to say they aren’t put on, but that never did Blair any harm. With the war on Brexit going to extra time and many people feeling their democratic rights were under threat*, Boris was probably seen as the most attractive prospect to fight for that cause, and in many ways had come to embody it too. And then a withdrawal agreement was struck in principle and the Corbyn manifesto came out, making the voting choice ridiculously easy for folks like me.

 

But I guess my point is that personality definitely played a part in his becoming leader, even if the last election became something where I would have voted for a monkey in a blue rosette on the day. There’s a good argument to say that’s exactly what I did vote for of course! But I don’t regret it. Still, I can’t say that Boris’s personality is a great turn-on for me to vote for him again. Too many lies and troubling manoeuvres, too many gaffes and I don’t believe he’d be greatly respected on the world stage. He may well ultimately need replacing before the next election, although by who is anyone’s guess given the apparent options. For me, out of the two I’d definitely say Starmer comes across as the one I’d rather have running the country, not just pandemic-wise but generally - as long as he shares a vision for moving the country onwards and not tied back into Europe. And sure he’s slightly dull, but I’d take “slightly dull” quite happily after the last few years. The problem for me with Starmer is the Momentumite presence still lurking behind the curtains and occasionally saying whispering things like wanting to replace him with McDonnell. But that’s another topic.
 

 

*(not to start another argument over the rights or wrongs of that, but many undoubtedly felt that way)

[peach0000]

Just now, BenTheFox said:

As I mentioned in a previous post, one of the big reasons why Labour lost a number of votes in 2019 is due to their change of position over a people's vote, which clearly wasn't down to Corbyn. 

Very true. My opinion of the 2019 election was that the Labour Party sabotaged Corbyn to get rid of him essentially. It was a power grab from the centrists. It was all very ugly and has probably made Labour unelectable as they have alienated a lot of their most hardened supporters. 

[UpTheLeagueFox]

7 minutes ago, Dunge said:

I remember during the Conservative leadership contest there was some analysis done on the likely election outcomes of the different candidates, and there’s no doubt that Boris gave them the best result in the stats. I remember the worst one being Rory Stewart, which interested me. He came across as the most intelligent candidate, the most out-reaching, progressive and easily the one most palatable to “the left”. I liked him too, at least comparatively. However, there was one massive problem: Brexit. People on the left wouldn’t have abandoned their own party of choice for him, and because of his stance on Brexit the provincial vote would have gone to Farage. The Tories would have been blitzed.

 

But Boris coming top was also interesting, given he was up against the likes of Gove and Raab, who were also Brexiters. Now, I haven’t a lot of time for Raab and think he’s been vastly overrated by his party, but Gove is clever. He is, however, charmless. And whatever you say about Boris, he has charisma and he has charm. That’s not to say they aren’t put on, but that never did Blair any harm. With the war on Brexit going to extra time and many people feeling their democratic rights were under threat*, Boris was probably seen as the most attractive prospect to fight for that cause, and in many ways had come to embody it too. And then a withdrawal agreement was struck in principle and the Corbyn manifesto came out, making the voting choice ridiculously easy for folks like me.

 

But I guess my point is that personality definitely played a part in his becoming leader, even if the last election became something where I would have voted for a monkey in a blue rosette on the day. There’s a good argument to say that’s exactly what I did vote for of course! But I don’t regret it. Still, I can’t say that Boris’s personality is a great turn-on for me to vote for him again. Too many lies and troubling manoeuvres, too many gaffes and I don’t believe he’d be greatly respected on the world stage. He may well ultimately need replacing before the next election, although by who is anyone’s guess given the apparent options. For me, out of the two I’d definitely say Starmer comes across as the one I’d rather have running the country, not just pandemic-wise but generally - as long as he shares a vision for moving the country onwards and not tied back into Europe. And sure he’s slightly dull, but I’d take “slightly dull” quite happily after the last few years. The problem for me with Starmer is the Momentumite presence still lurking behind the curtains and occasionally saying whispering things like wanting to replace him with McDonnell. But that’s another topic.
 

 

*(not to start another argument over the rights or wrongs of that, but many undoubtedly felt that way)

A wonderfully balanced post, Dunge 

[LanguedocFox]

18 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

 

He's done pretty well creating that brand then (regardless whether you like him or not) and that brand has helped him win twice in London (not a Tory heartland overall), the Tory leadership and a whopping majority as Prime Minister.

A lot of people clearly like him and buy into Brand Boris.

Yes, which makes me dislike him even more. On both a public and a personal level, he is clearly a deeply unpleasant person, so creating and maintaining his brand is an achievement. But as Lincoln probably didn't say, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."

[Nalis]

14 hours ago, Dunge said:

I remember during the Conservative leadership contest there was some analysis done on the likely election outcomes of the different candidates, and there’s no doubt that Boris gave them the best result in the stats. I remember the worst one being Rory Stewart, which interested me. He came across as the most intelligent candidate, the most out-reaching, progressive and easily the one most palatable to “the left”. I liked him too, at least comparatively. However, there was one massive problem: Brexit. People on the left wouldn’t have abandoned their own party of choice for him, and because of his stance on Brexit the provincial vote would have gone to Farage. The Tories would have been blitzed.

 

But Boris coming top was also interesting, given he was up against the likes of Gove and Raab, who were also Brexiters. Now, I haven’t a lot of time for Raab and think he’s been vastly overrated by his party, but Gove is clever. He is, however, charmless. And whatever you say about Boris, he has charisma and he has charm. That’s not to say they aren’t put on, but that never did Blair any harm. With the war on Brexit going to extra time and many people feeling their democratic rights were under threat*, Boris was probably seen as the most attractive prospect to fight for that cause, and in many ways had come to embody it too. And then a withdrawal agreement was struck in principle and the Corbyn manifesto came out, making the voting choice ridiculously easy for folks like me.

 

But I guess my point is that personality definitely played a part in his becoming leader, even if the last election became something where I would have voted for a monkey in a blue rosette on the day. There’s a good argument to say that’s exactly what I did vote for of course! But I don’t regret it. Still, I can’t say that Boris’s personality is a great turn-on for me to vote for him again. Too many lies and troubling manoeuvres, too many gaffes and I don’t believe he’d be greatly respected on the world stage. He may well ultimately need replacing before the next election, although by who is anyone’s guess given the apparent options. For me, out of the two I’d definitely say Starmer comes across as the one I’d rather have running the country, not just pandemic-wise but generally - as long as he shares a vision for moving the country onwards and not tied back into Europe. And sure he’s slightly dull, but I’d take “slightly dull” quite happily after the last few years. The problem for me with Starmer is the Momentumite presence still lurking behind the curtains and occasionally saying whispering things like wanting to replace him with McDonnell. But that’s another topic.
 

 

*(not to start another argument over the rights or wrongs of that, but many undoubtedly felt that way)

While I voted the other way, this is an excellent post to explain as to why he won by so much.

[Dahnsouff]

14 hours ago, Dunge said:

I remember during the Conservative leadership contest there was some analysis done on the likely election outcomes of the different candidates, and there’s no doubt that Boris gave them the best result in the stats. I remember the worst one being Rory Stewart, which interested me. He came across as the most intelligent candidate, the most out-reaching, progressive and easily the one most palatable to “the left”. I liked him too, at least comparatively. However, there was one massive problem: Brexit. People on the left wouldn’t have abandoned their own party of choice for him, and because of his stance on Brexit the provincial vote would have gone to Farage. The Tories would have been blitzed.

 

But Boris coming top was also interesting, given he was up against the likes of Gove and Raab, who were also Brexiters. Now, I haven’t a lot of time for Raab and think he’s been vastly overrated by his party, but Gove is clever. He is, however, charmless. And whatever you say about Boris, he has charisma and he has charm. That’s not to say they aren’t put on, but that never did Blair any harm. With the war on Brexit going to extra time and many people feeling their democratic rights were under threat*, Boris was probably seen as the most attractive prospect to fight for that cause, and in many ways had come to embody it too. And then a withdrawal agreement was struck in principle and the Corbyn manifesto came out, making the voting choice ridiculously easy for folks like me.

 

But I guess my point is that personality definitely played a part in his becoming leader, even if the last election became something where I would have voted for a monkey in a blue rosette on the day. There’s a good argument to say that’s exactly what I did vote for of course! But I don’t regret it. Still, I can’t say that Boris’s personality is a great turn-on for me to vote for him again. Too many lies and troubling manoeuvres, too many gaffes and I don’t believe he’d be greatly respected on the world stage. He may well ultimately need replacing before the next election, although by who is anyone’s guess given the apparent options. For me, out of the two I’d definitely say Starmer comes across as the one I’d rather have running the country, not just pandemic-wise but generally - as long as he shares a vision for moving the country onwards and not tied back into Europe. And sure he’s slightly dull, but I’d take “slightly dull” quite happily after the last few years. The problem for me with Starmer is the Momentumite presence still lurking behind the curtains and occasionally saying whispering things like wanting to replace him with McDonnell. But that’s another topic.
 

 

*(not to start another argument over the rights or wrongs of that, but many undoubtedly felt that way)

Very nice post, well reasoned and observed, but I will ask the naughty question about WHY you think the bold part holds true for many? Feel free to ignore, but I assure you I am not trying to incite, but this argument never even slightly reached me, so would prefer to understand the view.

Edited 15 February 2021 by Dahnsouff

[Dunge]

20 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Very nice post, well reasoned and observed, but I will ask the naughty question about WHY you think the bold part holds true for many? Feel free to ignore, but I assure you I am not trying to incite, but this argument never even slightly reached me, so would prefer to understand the view.

No worries :-) (I don’t know how to do emojis on here yet.)

 

I apologise in advance for a longish post, but I want to provide some background to my answer here:

 

When I voted leave, I did so with a “Canada+”-type future relationship in mind. Essentially, I wanted to keep as close to Europe as possible without being strung to it. I was open to a Norway-type deal but always felt it unlikely without the EU giving way on some major things, in particular us not being under the control of the ECJ - worth asking but probably unrealistic.

 

What happened, however, was the split in parliament - those who wanted a hard Brexit or Canada+, those who wanted a soft Brexit or Norway+, and those who wanted a new People’s vote (ie Brexit overturned). None of the three sides could get a majority and Theresa May’s deal fell along with her premiership. So the country ended up in a lock as to what could happen next.

 

It was at that point that the People’s vote became a serious possibility as a way of resolving the matter. Now, I’ve seen and heard enough arguments over the years to know that people have different beliefs in what constituted good democracy at this point, so I don’t want to go provoking anyone by stating the following as some absolute, but I will say that I was against a second vote on the basis that you can’t call it democracy if you ignore a democratic vote because you don’t like it, to keep calling for new referendums until you get the result you want - proven to be very much the EU way incidentally: vote - crisis - revote - relief. I didn’t much like a soft Brexit either, but I accepted there was at least an argument that it wasn’t not specified on the ballot paper, even if it wasn’t what I had envisaged.

 

Once the People’s vote and soft Brexit became options, and Boris came back with his withdrawal deal (“oven-ready”), parliament filled with all kinds of dirty tricks from all sides - proroguing, trap amendments, posturing, no one “side” covering themselves in glory. But ultimately, here was a withdrawal deal, very much the kind of thing that I and others had in our minds when we first voted Brexit all those years ago, and parliament was set on finding ways to block it, including the Speaker himself, in one final blast to deny the result of that original vote, a vote that was put to us as “your choice”, and taken very seriously - at least by me. And this wasn’t any vote, this was the foundations for the future direction of the country. Some say it was too important a decision to be taken by the public. I’ve always been of the firm view that it was too important a decision not to be.

 

As I’ve said, what I’ve put above is opinion and I’ve seen way too much over the years - including lurking on these pages - to claim that there aren’t others that are firmly in opposite camps, just as forthright and stating that a People’s vote would actually have been the better democratic option. But it’s from the position I hold that I saw our elected officials trying to find ways of rejecting the original Brexit vote, deciding not to compromise with the May deal and going for the overturn. And I didn’t like it. It was exactly the kind of attempted abridging of democracy that I see in the EU’s power structures and that convinced me to vote leave in the first place. And it became clear to me that there were many others out there who were even more vehement about it than I was.

 

In conclusion, tl;dr: They wus tryin’ to steal R vote from us.

[Dahnsouff]

11 minutes ago, Dunge said:

No worries :-) (I don’t know how to do emojis on here yet.)

 

...post cut down for brevity....

 

In conclusion, tl;dr: They wus tryin’ to steal R vote from us.

Thanks, understand the viewpoint and the mistrust of the EU

 

Must confess that my doubts around Brexit relate to the process of the referendum and specifically the question posed. It was simply too vague with every single (voting) individual free, if not encouraged and entitled, to define their own meaning for the question asked. This of course includes me

 

The question to me defined the whole process, and due to the questions unsuitability for such an event, my support. Now I heard plenty of times to get over it, the meaning is clear, etc, and never accepted it tbh.

 

The situation now is that we are out, (well, as out as we can be in the short-mid term) and like everyone else who voted remain, we have to just get on with it. 

 

 

[Jon the Hat]

18 hours ago, foxile5 said:

One implies the other. As a society we've been aping America quite a bit this last decade but, bafflingly, only the shit parts. 

 

Over the next decade expect - 

 

Privatised health care and 'insurance' model. 

Massive rise in homelessness. 

Increased litigation. 

Universities splitting courses into component fragments. Charging more. 

Tories privatising the NHS never dies does it?

[foxile5]

44 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Tories privatising the NHS never dies does it?

They've made more than enough inroads and suggestions for it to be of concern, Jonathon. 

Edited 15 February 2021 by foxile5

[Parafox]

2 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

 

 

Must confess that my doubts around Brexit relate to the process of the referendum and specifically the question posed. It was simply too vague with every single (voting) individual free, if not encouraged and entitled, to define their own meaning for the question asked. This of course includes me

 

 

 

 

You can blame the coward, David Cameron for deliberately making the question yes or no. He knew what he was doing and that was absolving all responsibility of putting any case for or against regardless of his own belief or that of his party at the time, effectively making him unaccountable. I'm still unsure of what we did but whatever it was, we did it. Now we have to deal with whatever comes as a consequence.

[peach0000]

1 hour ago, foxile5 said:

They've made more than enough inroads and suggestions for it to be of concern, Jonathon. 

I have read recently that Boris Johnson what's to pull back on the privatisation under Cameron. He wants to 'renationalise' the entire NHS apparently. I mean I'll believe it when I see it but fair play if he does. I

[Dahnsouff]

2 minutes ago, Parafox said:

You can blame the coward, David Cameron for deliberately making the question yes or no. He knew what he was doing and that was absolving all responsibility of putting any case for or against regardless of his own belief or that of his party at the time, effectively making him unaccountable. I'm still unsure of what we did but whatever it was, we did it. Now we have to deal with whatever comes as a consequence.

Oooh, that **** is on the list alright, the great big cowardly turd.
 

No revisionism request here,  I fully back the democratic result and its time to get on with it, and Make America Britain Great Again *

 

* may contain colonialism

[Parafox]

18 hours ago, peach0000 said:

I always think people are too quick to dismiss Corbyn. He still has a lot of support and a lot of people voted for him. Saying he was loathed is writing off a third of the population and a majority of the younger generation.

Did you pay attention to his policies and proposals for any government he might lead? Not saying you're a Corbyn supporter btw.

[Facecloth]

1 minute ago, Parafox said:

Did you pay attention to his policies and proposals for any government he might lead? Not saying you're a Corbyn supporter btw.

Not what he said though. He said he still has plenty of support and saying he's loathed is ignoring a large chunk of the population who do like him.