Page 7 | Labour Voters. Honest question

Tryingtodobetter82 · 2025-12-29T23:46:53+00:00

I’m not looking to start an argument on this subject. I know it’s a very heated and emotive topic. I have strong views on political issues. What with algorithms and biased news organisations, it’s very easy to end up only seeing information that confirms what we already believe. Because of that, you don’t often hear the other side of the political divide. I’m honestly curious whether those who voted Labour at the last General Election, for reference I did not, would vote the same way if there were an early GE in January, purely hypothetical of course. If so, I’d really appreciate you sharing what you feel they’ve done right so far in their term. I’m asking as I genuinely want to understand different perspectives. YABU - I would vote labour again YANBU - I wouldn’t vote for them again (or ever have)

Fizzink38 · 31/12/2025 10:31

Completely appreciate the comment about a right wing press, but it's important to be accurate about achievements. There haven't been 6,500 more teachers, nowhere near. It was an election pledge, now fudged to remove the 'new' element. They measure it on numbers of teachers in the workplace - which only shows an increase 1, 500 if you exclude primary teachers from the figures. It's actually 400 fewer teachers in the workforce.

I didn't vote Labour last time, will vote Green in the next election.

EasternStandard · 31/12/2025 10:31

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 31/12/2025 10:27

I agree. I’d say he’s obviously a decent man. Not particularly good at politics, but decent.

But that’s no obstacle to MN’s Labour die-hards who invented all sorts of horrible conspiracy stories about corrupt dealings with his father-in-law and about his wife and their tax affairs. ‘Richi’ Sunak 🙄

Show quote history

Apparently no one uses names like this except for Labour.

They were wrong on him leaving after the GE too, said with such confidence.

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 31/12/2025 10:27

TheRishi · 31/12/2025 10:05

This is what I feel as well. Sunak is a decent and honourable man.

Show quote history

I agree. I’d say he’s obviously a decent man. Not particularly good at politics, but decent.

But that’s no obstacle to MN’s Labour die-hards who invented all sorts of horrible conspiracy stories about corrupt dealings with his father-in-law and about his wife and their tax affairs. ‘Richi’ Sunak 🙄

1dayatatime · 31/12/2025 10:17

TheRishi · 31/12/2025 10:05

This is what I feel as well. Sunak is a decent and honourable man.

Show quote history

To be fair Theresa May was also decent and honourable although clearly made a dreadful mistake in going for a snap election.

TheRishi · 31/12/2025 10:05

1dayatatime · 31/12/2025 09:38

Rishi Sunak was a decent honourable PM, however the damage done by his predecessors principally Truss and Johnson meant that he was given an impossible task and was in an unrecoverable position.

He was right about Labour and their tax rises. He suggested a form of national and community service, which was ridiculed by Starmer as "some kind of Dad's Army", only for Starmer to suggest a similar policy 18 months later.
He was criticised for "going to quit being an MP and leaving the UK when he lost the election", yet despite not needing the money he has stayed on as a decent local constituency MP.

Unfortunately he was the right guy at the wrong time, but the Tory party members inflicted this on themselves by choosing Truss who was easily and by far the worst PM in living history.

Show quote history

This is what I feel as well. Sunak is a decent and honourable man.

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 31/12/2025 09:55

1dayatatime · 31/12/2025 09:38

Rishi Sunak was a decent honourable PM, however the damage done by his predecessors principally Truss and Johnson meant that he was given an impossible task and was in an unrecoverable position.

He was right about Labour and their tax rises. He suggested a form of national and community service, which was ridiculed by Starmer as "some kind of Dad's Army", only for Starmer to suggest a similar policy 18 months later.
He was criticised for "going to quit being an MP and leaving the UK when he lost the election", yet despite not needing the money he has stayed on as a decent local constituency MP.

Unfortunately he was the right guy at the wrong time, but the Tory party members inflicted this on themselves by choosing Truss who was easily and by far the worst PM in living history.

Show quote history

If Johnson had come clean about parties in No 10 he’d have gone down in history as a decent PM. But he couldn’t overcome the lies told by Labour about Covid PPE contracts. No matter how many court cases GLP lost nobody bothered to read the judgments. That nonsense carries on even today. It’s been raised on this thread.

And to be fair to Truss, her mistake was planning to spend too much too quickly, while cutting tax. It’s a funny old world when state handouts are appalling under Truss but virtuous under Labour.

1dayatatime · 31/12/2025 09:53

As a former LibDem voter I am actually much more disappointed in them than Labour.

They have 72 seats (only slightly less than the Tories on 119seats). Yet their only policies seem to be "Trump is a really bad person " and "Farage is a really bad person".

Now I don't disagree with those views but as Kamala Harris clearly demonstrated you need a bit more in policy, other than not being the "other guy" in order to get elected.

They had so much electoral opportunity to make themselves relevant whilst Labour hashed the economy and the Tories were in post election turmoil but completely blew it.

I might strongly disagree with Labour policies but at least they are doing something. I will never vote for the LibDem's at the next election.

1dayatatime · 31/12/2025 09:38

TheRishi · 31/12/2025 08:39

I miss Rishi Sunak a lot. Kinda wish we'd just stuck with him. He wasn't perfect, but a lot better than the current lot.

Show quote history

Rishi Sunak was a decent honourable PM, however the damage done by his predecessors principally Truss and Johnson meant that he was given an impossible task and was in an unrecoverable position.

He was right about Labour and their tax rises. He suggested a form of national and community service, which was ridiculed by Starmer as "some kind of Dad's Army", only for Starmer to suggest a similar policy 18 months later.
He was criticised for "going to quit being an MP and leaving the UK when he lost the election", yet despite not needing the money he has stayed on as a decent local constituency MP.

Unfortunately he was the right guy at the wrong time, but the Tory party members inflicted this on themselves by choosing Truss who was easily and by far the worst PM in living history.

CainsArm · 31/12/2025 09:10

DeepBlueDeer · 31/12/2025 08:52

I can accept:

that unemployment is slightly up and Labour, and that's largely due to where they've decided to levy taxes and hinders growth.
that Labour's policy to make incremental steps that are consistent with decolonizing the education system is unduly rage inducing to some.
that "Rachel maths aside" is a good vibe.

But no, there still won't be any blasphemy laws.

I mostly attribute the fanatical hatred of a very moderate government, navigating a different period of the country, to absurd levels of hyperbole mixed with significant disinformation, peddled via right wing social and print media. Its positively batshit.

Show quote history

Whether or not you know what’s best for people if only they could see through the disinformation as you are able to. You must accept that it’s a minority view that education needs decolonisation? Or that it’s a minority view that laws that ‘touch’ on blasphemy are required? Or that unemployment should go up to increase benefit allowances? My question is do you think the Government have a mandate for this? I’d suggest no, which is the driver for the ‘fanatical’ hatred. Authoritarian governments will attract hate.

EasternStandard · 31/12/2025 08:55

DeepBlueDeer · 31/12/2025 08:52

I can accept:

that unemployment is slightly up and Labour, and that's largely due to where they've decided to levy taxes and hinders growth.
that Labour's policy to make incremental steps that are consistent with decolonizing the education system is unduly rage inducing to some.
that "Rachel maths aside" is a good vibe.

But no, there still won't be any blasphemy laws.

I mostly attribute the fanatical hatred of a very moderate government, navigating a different period of the country, to absurd levels of hyperbole mixed with significant disinformation, peddled via right wing social and print media. Its positively batshit.

Show quote history

What’s your sector like in terms of jobs? Do you feel pretty secure. And do you know any graduates looking for work?

DeepBlueDeer · 31/12/2025 08:52

CainsArm · 31/12/2025 08:27

Rachel maths aside, we’ve established that Labour have increased unemployment by 11%, increased redundancies by 32%, plan to introduce blasphemy laws and the ‘decolonisation the curriculum’ (amongst a whole plethora of other quite sinister and wacky stuff). Can we also accept that these are deliberate and calculated acts so we skip past the part where we pretend anyone is the least bit surprised that huge tax rises push up unemployment and increase redundancies?… ..do you understand the anger towards them and why they’re so widely despised ? Even if you think all these are good things, you must understand that most people don’t and that the Government don’t have a mandate for this?

Show quote history

I can accept:

that unemployment is slightly up and Labour, and that's largely due to where they've decided to levy taxes and hinders growth.
that Labour's policy to make incremental steps that are consistent with decolonizing the education system is unduly rage inducing to some.
that "Rachel maths aside" is a good vibe.

But no, there still won't be any blasphemy laws.

I mostly attribute the fanatical hatred of a very moderate government, navigating a different period of the country, to absurd levels of hyperbole mixed with significant disinformation, peddled via right wing social and print media. Its positively batshit.

EasternStandard · 31/12/2025 08:49

TheRishi · 31/12/2025 08:39

I miss Rishi Sunak a lot. Kinda wish we'd just stuck with him. He wasn't perfect, but a lot better than the current lot.

Show quote history

So many dislike Starmer it will be a liability for Labour.

TheRishi · 31/12/2025 08:39

GaIadriel · 31/12/2025 06:02

I'd rather have Boris back than Starmer tbh.

I miss Rishi Sunak a lot. Kinda wish we'd just stuck with him. He wasn't perfect, but a lot better than the current lot.

CainsArm · 31/12/2025 08:27

DeepBlueDeer · 31/12/2025 00:25

On rates

I'm not sure why you are struggling to get it, I gave a clear example. E.g. if a rate (of anything) increases from 1% to 2% then both of the following are true:

the rate has increased by 1%, and
there has been a 100% increase.

When it comes to discussing rate rises, you usually see them expressed in the former manner.

For example, the redundancy rate when Rishi Sunak took office was 2.7 per 1,000 employees, and 3.8 when he left office. I never saw anyone present that as a 41% increase (even though it is).

That's because the percentage increase is not generally what's important, the extent (raw numbers) of the increase is.

E.g. a hypothetical:

Government A: come into power with the redundancy rate at 1 worker in 1,000. When they leave office, it is 2 workers in 1,000.

Government B: come into power with rather rate at 50 in 1,000. They leave with the rate at 75 in 1,000.

For ease of math, we'll assume 30 million workers in the country.

Under Government A, there is a 100% increase in the redundancy rate, and an "extra" 30,000 rendancies.

Government B has a much smaller increase in the rate (only a 50% increase) but an "extra" 750,000 redundancies (25 times more actual job losses compared to Gov A).

I think most people would acknowledge that Government B's numbers are far worse and the % increase is not a very relevant measure.

On the border
By your logic, then, presumably every country in the world has always had an open border policy (i.e. the opposite of what is actually true).

The blasphemy laws stuff did touch on some relevant real concerns, and the Labour-appointed working group identified the same issues. At this point, we can safely say that blasphemy laws are not being introduced, neither "by the back door". People who are continuing to peddle that talking point are being dishonest.

Although it's a bit of a nebulous concept, I think decolonizing the curriculum is a plainly and obviously good thing.

In terms of history, I'd rather students were taught about a range of different perspectives than something more akin to propaganda.

In terms of culture, it is perfectly possible to teach things of " white British" cultural signifiance, but also touch on other cultures too.

I'd rather a generation of well-informed children, armed with a sense of perspective and critical thinking skills, vs an army of unwaveringly patriotic, unquestioning and insular "model Brits".

Edited

Show quote history

Rachel maths aside, we’ve established that Labour have increased unemployment by 11%, increased redundancies by 32%, plan to introduce blasphemy laws and the ‘decolonisation the curriculum’ (amongst a whole plethora of other quite sinister and wacky stuff). Can we also accept that these are deliberate and calculated acts so we skip past the part where we pretend anyone is the least bit surprised that huge tax rises push up unemployment and increase redundancies?… ..do you understand the anger towards them and why they’re so widely despised ? Even if you think all these are good things, you must understand that most people don’t and that the Government don’t have a mandate for this?

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 31/12/2025 07:56

GaIadriel · 31/12/2025 06:02

I'd rather have Boris back than Starmer tbh.

God, I wouldn't.

GaIadriel · 31/12/2025 06:02

I'd rather have Boris back than Starmer tbh.

DeepBlueDeer · 31/12/2025 05:11

MandingoAteMyBaby · 31/12/2025 00:34

Still so vague.

“Tightening the borders” - what does that look like ?

“Pull factors”
”Push factors”

Concrete - how do you “tighten the borders” ?

Show quote history

Thing is, Labour tightened the borders by reducing the pull factors (harder visas, stricter settlement requirements, tougher employer rules) and managing push‑factor pressures (stronger border controls and asylum processing). There's also the mooted ID cards.

There's not much more they can reasonably do that does not either require greater international coordination or violating international law.

MandingoAteMyBaby · 31/12/2025 00:34

CainsArm · 30/12/2025 23:20

Tightening the borders, removing pull factors, encouraging push factors. There will also be a massive reduction in legal migration. It’s going to be an interesting time. I’m usually live and let live and not too fussed about politics in general, but this Government has infuriated me with their horrendously damaging ideology and policies so much that I find myself on mumsnet at 11pm !!!

Show quote history

Still so vague.

“Tightening the borders” - what does that look like ?

“Pull factors”
”Push factors”

Concrete - how do you “tighten the borders” ?

DeepBlueDeer · 31/12/2025 00:25

CainsArm · 30/12/2025 22:23

I had unemployment at 3.8% when Labour took over and now 4.6% so 20% increase. Happy to take your figures though, so unemployment up 11%. I don’t understand this ‘how you frame it’ though, it is just basic maths.

The average monthly redundancies 2024 was 38000 and was 52000 in 2025, that’s just over a 32% increase in a year. Again I’m not sure about how you frame it, frankly I would quite like a 0.5% raise using your Labour logic if my pay actually goes up 32%.

I don’t see the analogy with murder, if you can enter UK border with no documentation or permission then the border isn’t closed.

You can disagree on the terminology of the blasphemy laws that they keep trying to push, but it’s clear what it is in reality.

Again we can disagree with the terminology of decolonise the curriculum, but we both know where they’re pushing. It seems rather disingenuous to deny this, it just shows contempt for the electorate. Heres a much more recent link analysis of what Labour are attempting https://www.craig-smith.uk/news/labours-curriculum-agenda-education-or-indoctrination

Edited

Show quote history

On rates

I'm not sure why you are struggling to get it, I gave a clear example. E.g. if a rate (of anything) increases from 1% to 2% then both of the following are true:

the rate has increased by 1%, and
there has been a 100% increase.