Can’t remember which polling company it was but I remember Corbynistas despising one of the main ones too haha.
11.03.2026 11:59
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 2
📌 0
Can’t remember which polling company it was but I remember Corbynistas despising one of the main ones too haha.
This is why reforms to the civil service which simply look at headcount are completely wrongheaded. The civil service needs to focus on (re)developing its capabilities so tasks can be done in-house instead of by parasitic consultancy companies. Ditto universities.
www.ft.com/content/f7ff...
Looking at those Starmer ratings, there must be someone in Downing Street tasked with devising a ‘legacy policy’ for Starmer to introduce before bowing out. I wonder what the hell that could be.
Obviously I suspect Starmer is still hoping for some unforeseen miracle to prolong his premiership.
Looks like we’re going to get more demand management to attend to a supply shock.
I wouldn’t advocate going to Mars as an economic policy, but I’ve just read Mission Economy: A Moonshot Guide to Changing Capitalism by Mariana Mazzucato and it does make me think there would be many positive economic spillovers from a Mars mission. Obviously a decarbonised mission would be better.
I mean this is the kind of headline Starmer (should) be dreaming about. Probably too little too late but some distance between him and anything Blair-flavoured is his only hope of survival.
Absolutely this. My brother is a surgeon; he's used Claude to write an app for his patients. It's not a masterpiece and it won't change the economy, but it is easier for them than trying to fill in timesheets of how much exercise they are able to take. Sensible scepticism has to recognise reality.
Starmer walking into Downing Street later.
The political strategy could also work better for New Labour when there perhaps was a median voter to target. Completely different era now and yet Starmer speaks and acts as though the New Labour approach is going to work again.
Strategy, yes, but underlying philosophy of government? I don’t think they do. Certainly Starmer doesn’t who takes pride in saying there is no Starmerism. For a leader that is the equivalent of saying ‘I don’t read books’.
One of the only ‘thinkers’ on Lab’s front bench, alongside Miliband, is Reeves. She has at times articulated some kind of vision with her Securonomics agenda inspired by Bidenomics. The problem is she is completely inconsistent in applying it & far too timid. Much higher levels of investment needed.
This. New Labour wasn't just wars & media spin. It was a serious attempt to apply an updated social democracy to new socio-economic conditions - eg NMW, tax credits, expanding HE. This govt is making no comparable efforts (maybe coz, given economic stagnation, it's harder.)
The logical outcome of the McSweeney ‘efficiency’ strategy with an electorate in distinct voting blocs.
If this was something Starmer would plausibly consider then surely it would have made sense to let Burnham stand given he polls best against Reform.
I have a feeling that the British public are closer to the Starmer position on Iran than this gung-ho commentary suggests
www.express.co.uk/news/politic...
Imagine there was a war on in the Middle East and the US president was using his time to talk about curtains...
If you're wondering why Starmer first refused US access to UK bases then granted it, I suspect the answer is the same in both cases: US plan is flaky as hell. Shd we join illegal strikes on a country capable of retaliating, with someone this clueless about what next?
www.nytimes.com/2026/03/01/u...
Even in Brexit-voting seats, there are still a significant number of left-liberal voters. The key to winning the constituency is mobilising them. Especially if the right is fragmented.
Absolutely. How many MPs looking at the result on Fri will want to signal to the left bloc they are best to represent liberal values? My guess is an awful lot; rebelling against the immigration bill is the perfect way to signal it. That’s assuming they know their base better than Starmer of course.
Too many who should know better are backing this war. It wouldn't be happening if a) Trump were a remotely serious president who knew the risks of embarking on something whose aims he still can't specify, and b) Netanyahu wasn't embracing regional chaos as his get out of jail free card.
Well, no, they’re not just as wrong. The bigger error is not seeing that “trying to win over voters from a party on the opposite end of the spectrum, whose values your core voters oppose” is not same as “chasing voters from party on same side ideologically whose values your core voters like.”
Iran is four times the size of Syria. If the country collapses into civil war after US military intervention there would be an enormous refugee crisis for Europe.
Why? Sounds like it came straight from a McSweeney text message?
Less trouble than he’s in now, I suspect.
Starmer clearly still logging on to McSweeneyGPT for today’s lines.
I was wrong. It’s not humorous.
Not sure it’s electoral systems. Both have majoritarian ones. It’s just that in spite of the UK’s majoritarian system, politics is fragmenting in a way that has not happened in the US.
Someone introduce the esteemed BBC Political Editor to the First-Past-The-Post electoral system we have in the UK.
Median voter theory is a hard drug to kick.
Over the past eighteen months, the political science consensus on the nature of Labour's vote has been absolutely correct - and yet also completely ignored by pundits and strategists who continue to get it wrong.