Reform UK's chronicles

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Think you'll find the current state of the UK is 'highly skewed in the favour of remain'.
You were all warned, so can't blame politicians...

But we are out so remaining isn't an option

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Think you'll find the current state of the UK is 'highly skewed in the favour of remain'.
You were all warned, so can't blame politicians...

Yes - I've seen the stats. I find it interesting that Starmer didn't add rejoin to his election pledges.

Anyway, now's not the time as they're in a huge mess which we would then have to pay into. We have enough mess of our own.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

a third of the people that voted for it are dead

I doubt that, where is your evidence for this ?

[Russ]

Great to see Reform celebrating St George’s Day.

Strange how they were silent on Saints David, Andrew and Patrick’s Days.

Very telling of their attitude.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Russ

Great to see Reform celebrating St George’s Day.

Strange how they were silent on Saints David, Andrew and Patrick’s Days.

Very telling of their attitude.

I just don't know where Reform UK stand these days.

They seem to be wanting to undo all of Thatcher's legacy by nationalisation and one of their people was in the press recently advocating for reparations to be paid to our former colonies.

They seem to be making policy up on the hoof.

[Russ]

You're giving them far too much credit.

They're usually (DISCLAIMER: please note the word "usually") the thick people who think Britain and England are the same.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I just don't know where Reform UK stand these days.

They seem to be wanting to undo all of Thatcher's legacy by nationalisation and one of their people was in the press recently advocating for reparations to be paid to our former colonies.

They seem to be making policy up on the hoof.

The problem is that Thatcher's legacy has unwound. I never approved of here denationalisation back in the 90s. I could foresee what would happen, and did happen. The water companies illustrate it perfectly - how foreign majors bought Fred out, then asset stripped the companies into huge debts.

Farage understands that. Though where he's gonna find the the money for re-nationalisation other than be borrowing it is beyond me. Perhaps grow the economy first.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The problem is that Thatcher's legacy has unwound. I never approved of here denationalisation back in the 90s. I could foresee what would happen, and did happen. The water companies illustrate it perfectly - how foreign majors bought Fred out, then asset stripped the companies into huge debts.

Farage understands that. Though where he's gonna find the the money for re-nationalisation other than be borrowing it is beyond me. Perhaps grow the economy first.

There are ways and means, c.f. Stephen Byers and Railtrack.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The problem is that Thatcher's legacy has unwound. I never approved of here denationalisation back in the 90s. I could foresee what would happen, and did happen. The water companies illustrate it perfectly - how foreign majors bought Fred out, then asset stripped the companies into huge debts.

Farage understands that. Though where he's gonna find the the money for re-nationalisation other than be borrowing it is beyond me. Perhaps grow the economy first.

I think that's the crux of the problem for Reform UK. If they're serious about winning, their policies like the £20k tax free allowance need to be costed. Stating you want economic growth is one thing, it doesn't make it happen.

Reform is the same as the Lib Dems. They never need to budget anything because they know they won't win. 20k tax-free allowance isn't going to happen.

I am surprised Labour, who you think are naturally predisposed to nationalisation, haven't understood it would probably be quite popular now. They're still chasing an imaginary voter from 10-15 years ago who is wary of government ownership of anything and believes in privatisation unreservedly. In reality, I think voters are far more sceptical of private multinational companies and would welcome government ownership of utilities and rail. It would be an act of populism to give these things 'back to the people' from the hands of foreign ownership, which Farage and the left have understood but the main parties have not.

Labour is chasing a moderate free-market Thatcher voter from the early 2000s, which doesn't exist, and the Tories are chasing a British Trump voter, which doesn't exist.

Do either of them know who their voters are?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I think that's the crux of the problem for Reform UK. If they're serious about winning, their policies like the £20k tax free allowance need to be costed. Stating you want economic growth is one thing, it doesn't make it happen.

You're absolutely right. The Tories failed, Labour is failing (and those lying toads promised that their plans were "fully costed").

A wise Reform leader would be lining up the ducks right now, costing the plans in conjunction with industry and finance leaders so that well in advance of the GE, they will know where to borrow from to kick start it all.


---------- Post added at 11:55 ---------- Previous post was at 11:51 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

Reform is the same as the Lib Dems. They never need to budget anything because they know they won't win. 20k tax-free allowance isn't going to happen.

<SNIP>

Labour is chasing a moderate free-market Thatcher voter from the early 2000s, which doesn't exist, and the Tories are chasing a British Trump voter, which doesn't exist.

Do either of them know who their voters are?

Good point. The British voter is fickle and will vote emotionally. Brexit was an example, and chucking out the Tories was another.

Therefore, at this point, Reform cannot be ruled out. Imo.

Originally Posted by Damien

Reform is the same as the Lib Dems. They never need to budget anything because they know they won't win. 20k tax-free allowance isn't going to happen.

I am surprised Labour, who you think are naturally predisposed to nationalisation, haven't understood it would probably be quite popular now. They're still chasing an imaginary voter from 10-15 years ago who is wary of government ownership of anything and believes in privatisation unreservedly. In reality, I think voters are far more sceptical of private multinational companies and would welcome government ownership of utilities and rail. It would be an act of populism to give these things 'back to the people' from the hands of foreign ownership, which Farage and the left have understood but the main parties have not.

Labour is chasing a moderate free-market Thatcher voter from the early 2000s, which doesn't exist, and the Tories are chasing a British Trump voter, which doesn't exist.

Do either of them know who their voters are?

The privatisations of the 1980s were sold on the premise that the shares would be owned by Sid (assuming anyone ever told him). Middle Class Thatcherites all bought in to the idea that these privatisations were true public ownership because Joe Public was buying all the shares.

That wasn’t entirely true in the 1980s, and it certainly isn’t true now.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Therefore, at this point, Reform cannot be ruled out. Imo.

You summed it up with..

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

A wise Reform leader

In the main, Reform voters aren't going to be swayed by a "wise" leader; that's who they've been trained to rebel against. After all, politics needed a 'reform', right? Something different from the "usual" politics.

This is why former investment banker Farage is trying to portray himself as "one of us". Many Reform fans are attracted to knee-jerk ideas ("send them all back" etc), and a wise leader will stay away from these, thereby marginalising the traditional Reform voter.

As Damien says, all the political ambition of the Lib Dems. What does make reform different (although still no more likely to win an election) is their ability to "worry" the main parties, in the way UKIP's rise in popularity pushed Cameron into offering the referendum

Originally Posted by Chris

The privatisations of the 1980s were sold on the premise that the shares would be owned by Sid.

Sid owned them for a while, then sold them on.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Russ

You summed it up with..



In the main, Reform voters aren't going to be swayed by a "wise" leader; that's who they've been trained to rebel against. After all, politics needed a 'reform', right? Something different from the "usual" politics.

This is why former investment banker Farage is trying to portray himself as "one of us". Many Reform fans are attracted to knee-jerk ideas ("send them all back" etc), and a wise leader will stay away from these, thereby marginalising the traditional Reform voter.

As Damien says, all the political ambition of the Lib Dems. What does make reform different (although still no more likely to win an election) is their ability to "worry" the main parties, in the way UKIP's rise in popularity pushed Cameron into offering the referendum

As I said, voters are fickle. They might choose Reform on the basis of not Labour nor Conservative.

My point was that Reform would need to have pre-sorted out the HOW of getting the economy right within a reasonable timeframe taking into account the forces that bear on the matter. This might gain them votes from people who are not fickle, but the "anyone else" vote is what they're after.

Actually I don't thin that we are in disagreement on this.