(01-20-2026, 09:22 AM)Protheroe Wrote:

(01-20-2026, 09:18 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: Are you trying to defend Reform by slating a Tory? If not what’s the point you’re trying to make?

Stop it with the Cathy Newman tribute act.

The point I'm making is that Worcestershire County Council was entering life support long before Reform took over. Adam Kent is one of the people responsible for that. IMO he's no Tory either, he belongs in the Labour Party.

(01-20-2026, 09:11 AM)Protheroe Wrote:

(01-19-2026, 07:56 PM)man in the corner shop Wrote: Councillor Adam Kent, opposition Conservative group leader

Adam Kent is one of the most venal social climbers I've ever met in the Tory Party. Absolute cnut

---

(01-20-2026, 09:06 AM)Pontificator Wrote: OK Darling started cutting the deficit, but the pace and scale mattered. The tory led government chose to accelerate austerity, through ideological cuts, rather than necessity. Talk of structural deficits and balancing the books was the cover for shrinking the state. Economists warned that austerity in a slump would prolong the downturn. They were right: growth was stifled, services hollowed out, productivity stalled and we’re still paying the price. And of course it led to Brexit. Corbyn was right about the cuts.

Blimey. So the negative real interest rate policy supported by all parties (and most people on here) had nothing to do with economic stagnation and the diversion of investment into non-productive assets? Wowzers.

Corbyn his never been right about anything in his life.

Blaming "austerity" for the state of the UK economy is as stupid as claiming Labour "spending too much" caused the GFC.

(01-20-2026, 09:06 AM)Pontificator Wrote:

(01-19-2026, 09:23 AM)man in the corner shop Wrote: And there we have it. "It was the GFC guv, nothing to do with me or my party guv. That GFC was caused by Gordon Brown you know, guv.
Come back guv, stop covering your ears up guv. I have something relevant to say"

The “Labour caused the crash by spending too much” was every day of course. It was the biggest single lie from a government in my long life. Clegg, Cable, Alexander et al gave it their full throated support (sanctimonious lying power hungry fuckwits) The MSM particularly the BBC failed to challenge it. It cut through. The opposition went missing just as the Torys have for the last 19 months. What's next?

---

(01-16-2026, 12:12 PM)Borin' Baggie Wrote:

(01-16-2026, 11:16 AM)Squid Wrote:

(01-16-2026, 10:52 AM)Borin' Baggie Wrote:

(01-16-2026, 10:28 AM)Fido Wrote: Our MP is Lib Dem and there's no other option for me, really. I know they're your crew and are closer to what they stand for, BB, but I'm still completely confused that in a world where Labour have not pulled up any trees (and built houses in their place), Tories are a complete mess and unvoteable and then the nasty party are gaining ever more ground that the Lib Dems have not made deep inroads into the political landscape. A Lib-Lab coalition is probably the most palatable solution but it seems to me that they are in no way prepared for something they should have, by now, set their sights on.

The party has spent the last 6 years turning into the 1950s version of the Tory party but with more progressive social stances and they're focusing on local campaigns over national ones because the party do not have populist messages to cut through unlike Reform and the Greens and don't have the inertia of the Tories and Labour. That coupled with the most-Lib Dem friendly media outlets, the FT and Economist, being above party politics for the former and being pissed off the Lib Dems aren't perfect to them (even though I wager most of the editorial board voted them over Labour despite endorsing Labour at the last election, especially given how the articles about both parties have been since the last election).

Ultimately, do the British press want to talk about fundamental reforms to business rates and SDLT to transition them to a land value tax? I don't think they do, we've had the whole business rates fiasco and they never brought it up, just said that it was too high and would punish pubs. Do they want to talk about the social care crisis? Do they want to talk about the £100k tax trap? I don't think they do.

Blaming the LD failure to achieve any sort of cut through on the mainstream media when social media has far more reach seems a bit of a limp excuse. I'm sure the LD party isn't poor. A decent comms team could do a lot for them. Likewise, getting their more charismatic MPs out there. Just shrugging their shoulders and saying "Alas, we're too sensible to be popular" is really rather weak.

Populism is not the same as being popular and communicating on social media is about soundbites and responses to those soundbites and not deep policy proposals and their implications.

---

(01-16-2026, 12:11 PM)Pontificator Wrote: The point about them there Lib Dem whoppers, they were 100% behind Osborn and thats where it all started

The fiscal policy response implemented during the coalition was the same as was presented by Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. Are you a Corbynite now?

OK Darling started cutting the deficit, but the pace and scale mattered. The tory led government chose to accelerate austerity, through ideological cuts, rather than necessity. Talk of structural deficits and balancing the books was the cover for shrinking the state. Economists warned that austerity in a slump would prolong the downturn. They were right: growth was stifled, services hollowed out, productivity stalled and we’re still paying the price. And of course it led to Brexit. Corbyn was right about the cuts.

(01-20-2026, 02:24 PM)Borin' Baggie Wrote: The cuts made during the coalition were in line with the March 2015 budget and 2010 Labour manifesto. It was not "accelerated" until the first budget after the May 2015 election

In fact, the scale of cuts was softer than what Labour proposed as it happened over 5 years Vs the 4 year programme from Labour.

(01-20-2026, 04:25 PM)Jacko Wrote: What Proth said...