Labour canvasser today

[SirSamVimesCityWatch]

I'm in one the constituencies with a by-election coming up.

Just had a labour canvasser (woman, mid/late fifties) knock to ask if I was voting. I said yes I would be.

She asked if I knew who I was voting for. I asked if she knew what a woman was. I told her I was a single issue voter and that was the only issue that was going to decide how I voted.

Her response: "I believe a woman is anyone who believes themself to be a woman".

I told her in that case I have nothing else to say to her, and closed the door.

I would have loved to have actually put some of the issues to her (rapists in prisons, assaults in mixed sex spaces, including schools, destruction of women's sports etc) but my heart was already racing and I knew it would be like talking to a brick wall anyway.

But anyway - at least that's a clear pile in the eye for the whole 'it doesn't come up on the doorstep' nonsense.

So, I'm either voting Tory or SDP.

A pattern I've noticed with posters who are incredulous that anyone would vote Tory because of this, is that they take two things as read:

One that of course Labour will be better at things like funding the NG, trains, education, etc, because they are Labour and that is what they stand for.

and,

That Tory people, or at least MPs, don't give a shit about any actual problems, or people except the rich, or social justice, or anything. They are happy for the majority to live shit lives as long as rich white peopel are ok.

And in a way that makes sense, if you really take those things as your base assumptions, it's a strong motivator.

But neither is obvious. The second in fact is so clearly untrue that I am not sure how anyone continues to believe it. Do they just class the many examples of people who do not think or behave that way as outliers? Or they are so wedded to the idea that they don't notice the many many exceptions? Or they live in such a bubble they never actually meet anyone outside o their own political tribe nor do they see any news or literature about other people that is positive?

But even as far as the first question - it's certainly true that the fabric of public life has not done well in recent years under the Conservatives. But it's very difficult to see how it would be substantially different under Labour. The underlying issues aren't going to change. And they don't seem to have any brilliant ideas, out of the box approaches.

I think it can help to try and look with a bit of a wider lens at how things are going in other places, with different kinds of governments. There are certain patterns that seem to be repeated in many places, and those are perhaps due to more super-national or global issues. Decline of infrastructure, problems with increasing costs of health services, housing, how to deal with immigration and international movement of people - these are problems everywhere and there are no clear answers.

The idea that simply voting in another party will answer these kinds of problems, in the absence of concrete plans to do it, is very naive IMO. People will be disappointed if they expect these solutions are going to materialize just because Labour gets in.

I think this is all true, and I am worried we will see people gravitate to extremist politics when it becomes clear that change of government brings no improvement.
truth is we are where we are as a consequence of what we screamed at the government to do. Shutting the country down and flooding it with free money was very popular. What did people think was going to happen as a result? It’s not like the consequences weren’t pointed out.

@ProtectAndTerf But I wondered if there were lots of spoiled ballots with the same slogan, would it get noticed? Picked up in the news? (Story fed to journalists?)
Just thinking of the one where someone spoiled their ballot with, er, a drawing, and it made the news as there was debate over whether to count it as a vote as it was next to a candidates name.

I guess we could have a terf equivalent of 'none of the above'. I'm pretty sure it's not illegal and numbers do get reported up - interesting piece here votingcounts.org.uk/spoilt-ballot start that thread 😈

Chase this up before casting your vote OP. You don't want to end up with a Jamie Wallis like the poor constituents of Brigend.

I think last time a lot of us did "respect my sex if you want my X" and "no men in women's spaces".

In suffragette colours, if you had the pens!

🤔

Had Jamie Wallis previously declared a position on sex-based rights? Before his series of unfortunate incidents and plainly unrelated transition, that is? I'd love to see it if he did.

But it would be very difficult to see how things would be under Labour.

Whoever comes next is going to have a mountain to climb, so deep is the damage that has been done by the Tories. However we can't even begin to climb it while the Tories are in power. Tory Party chaos made the UK unstable and uninvestable. A vote for them is a vote for continued political and economic instability.

I think this is a great idea OP. The use of colour means that they would be picked up by TV cameras.

Why will he listen when he is in power? He has made clear where his personal sympathies lie.
I disagree that he's made it clear. I think Starmer's strategy is to say the bare minimum and I expect that will continue.
I do think a comfortable majority might make him bolder because I don't think he's a complete idiot. Trouble is that, as I've already said, my regard for him and his party is haemorrhaging away, and I don't think I can vote for someone if I don't have at least a modicum of respect for them.

Remember “something which shouldn’t be said”?
that was him in an unguarded moment. It’s what he thinks. And so typical of him. Prissy, finger wagging, lecturing. He really is the most absurd little man.

What does saying as little as possible mean for women in reality?

Surely we need to know what they actually plan to do at some point

What does saying as little as possible mean for women in reality?
I think it means he will do as little for women as he thinks he can get away with.

he doesn’t think you need to know. He thinks you need to keep quiet and let the clever men decide, behind closed doors, once they’re in power. Then you put up and shut up.

Anyone who wants the measure of Starmer and his attitude towards women and towards voters only needs to read the 'webchat' right here on MN when he was standing for the Labour Party Leadership.

Surely we need to know what they actually plan to do at some point.
I think the plan will be vague, lawyer-approved soundbites with a dash of guilt tripping and 'yes but the Tories!' - pretty much what we've had on this thread in fact. My point is only that I disagree with posters who say he's made it clear where he personally stands. I don't think he has, and I no longer expect him to say where he stands.

Labour's MO for decades has been get into power on as bland a 'don't frighten the horses' approach as possible and then once in power do whatever the hell they want.

Read some of the New Labour era autobiographies. Post democratic era etc. The lack of respect for the electorate and democracy is about as boggling as the lack of respect or care for women.

This I find most enraging

If Starmer could actually answer a question and state the position of the Labour Party then fine. People can vote on it. If it didn’t go my way I’d not like it but that’s democracy.

This evasive approach is so incredibly insulting to women and he’s dangerous because of it. A horrible combination of cowardly, sneaky plus waffle.

Where do people get this stuff from?

Tory Party chaos made the UK unstable and uninvestable.

I googled is the UK investable?

This was the first link.

Foreign Direct Investment: UK remains second in Europe despite a fall in project numbers, new EY report reveals

The UK recorded 929 Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) projects in 2022, down 6.4% from 993 in 2021 – France continued to lead Europe with Germany ranked third.

https://www.ey.com/en_uk/news/2023/06/foreign-direct-investment-uk-remains-second-in-europe-despite-a-fall-in-project-numbers#:~:text=The%20UK%20remains%20second%20in,despite%20activity%20falling%20in%202022.

Investable? Left wing hyperbole is amusing.

I don't think anyone can make a statement like this on the basis that it's the same political party. A change in itself is meaningless.

If that were true, we could say the same about all of them, as they've all fucked up in power. None would be a party it would be possible to vote for. (Some people feel that way, mind you.)

What is more important is who is in the leadership team, and what policies, concretely, are they proposing.

The Tory team isn't what one might like, but they have a few people I think are quite competent. Sunak I think is a smart guy, and he shows some signs of being able to get the party on board. Kemi is very good. There are a few others perhaps. On policy, I would like to hear more concrete specifics, but I think they see where the problems lie.

As far as Labour, the leadership team is no more inspiring, and arguably less, because I think Starmer is proving to be a weak leader. On policy, there seem to be a few good ideas, but nothing that hits it out of the ballpark, lots of unanswered questions. Plus - the control on dissent within the party is hugely concerning to me, it could cause other issues as big as gender ideology.

In light of all this I see little reason to hope they would make things better, and real concern they could make things worse.

I broadly agree with this, but it’s too kind to labour. The stuff on private schools is on a par with the Brexit bus. They are profoundly dishonest in policy terms.

Plus a rooted belief that those most affected and most likely to object are a subordinate class. We just matter less. We just do. It’s not even conscious. It’s just the way they see the world.

Obscene hyperbole.

I’ve only read the immediate following posts but as everyone seems a-ok with this I can only assume that it’s fine with the insinuation that Labour=child raping and murdering.

ooytm.

But he has said what he thinks; that Self Id "doesn't go far enough". He's said it so many times when will people start to believe it?

Personally, I think it is one of the only manifesto pledges he hasn't broken and that is because it is keeping some of his more Left wing supporters on board.

Well, I am trying to be as non-biased in my assessment as possible.

But the private school stuff is very interesting, because I think it actually dovetailes very much into a lot of the concerns on gender ideology.

There is a real element around parental rights in terms of educating children, that the Labour Party doesn't seem to even be able to understand. As in, if you try and talk to someone about it, it's almost like they are just hearing wha-wha-wha - they cannot see that telling people they must submit their children so state education reflects on things like parental rights and freedom of thought. They don't even argue against it - they do not seem to recognize the question or the implications.

Which is partly why I think that GI i not so much a weird aberration as some believe for the LP. It is attached to their wider beliefs and worldview.