43
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by XraySonoCol@med-mastodon.com to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk

UK Labour are too Tory for me.
I've threatened that they've lost my vote. (edit)
On LGBTQIA, specifically trans rights.
On their plans for the NHS.
On their plans for health and wealth inequalities in the UK.
On their plans for the relationship the UK has with Europe.
They have to be less Tory to get my vote back.
It's not acceptable that to not vote Tory, we have to settle for what they offer. They assume their position is acceptable.
If they correct their position, I'll reconsider
@uk_politics

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is a good summary of Labour's actual policy positions, which are very different from your characterisation of them. You obviously have the right to vote for whoever you want to, for whatever reasons, but it's better to root your behaviour in reality, not rhetoric.

[-] noodle@feddit.uk 11 points 1 year ago

Thank you! It's actually worrying how much people seem to be basing their idea of what party policy will be on soundbites they've heard.

This country is in dire need of some political literacy. Thinking that the Tories and Lib Dems are somehow better on LGBQT issues than Labour would be hilarious if it wasn't a damning indictment of the intelligence of British voters.

[-] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Would you be able to unlock the article for us by any chance? 🙏

[-] noodle@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago

Search for it on archive.is

If you're on Firefox you can add a filter for paywalls to uBlock Origin.

[-] XraySonoCol@med-mastodon.com -3 points 1 year ago

@frankPodmore Unfortunately the pay wall prevents others from seeing this. I've read the entire article via the link given and it doesn't address several of my points, so I'm not clear which policy positions you're referring to.
In fact the opening paragraph agrees with me:
"It has been said that in sidelining the Labour party’s Corbynite left wing and manoeuvring it towards the centre, Sir Keir Starmer has made the UK opposition barely distinguishable in tone from the governing Conservatives."

[-] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 13 points 1 year ago

No, it doesn't agree with you. Really basic reading comprehension error, there. It says people have said that, not that it is true. It spends the following 600 words demolishing that case.

[-] noodle@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago

Paywalls are easily circumvented. This isn't a good excuse.

For the uninitiated; Copy the article address and paste it into the search bar on archive.is. There are multiple paywall bypass methods, this is just one.

[-] XraySonoCol@med-mastodon.com 1 points 1 year ago

@noodle As I said I've read it, via a different method to you, but thanks for sharing it.
Now other readers will be aware of a strategy. Not all strategies work so people may have to try more than one. In any case it's an inadequate article.

[-] noodle@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago

You responded within 1 minute of it being posted and then dismissed it for being too long, which it isn't. Anything less than 1500 words should take you about 5 minutes to read. That's not much of a commitment.

[-] XraySonoCol@med-mastodon.com -4 points 1 year ago

@noodle Skim, CTRL-F, then re-read, it's been quite some time now and it's still inadequate.

[-] XraySonoCol@med-mastodon.com -5 points 1 year ago

@frankPodmore My characterisation is broad and lacking detail, mostly for word count. There are other policies I've not detailed either.
As I've said elsewhere, my voicing my opinion to Labour and other left parties is as important as my vote.

[-] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is definitely less important than your vote. Also, I'm unconvinced you've read the article in the time you've had since I posted it.

EDIT: Why have you replied in so many different comments? I can't follow your argument if it's spread out like this!

[-] Emperor@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago

I think you might have broken them.

[-] XraySonoCol@med-mastodon.com -4 points 1 year ago

@frankPodmore
It is precisely as important because I value my vote and I decide to whom I give it, and because they need to know why they have my vote or not. The article is 632 words long.

[-] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 year ago

Even this argument shows that the 'why' of voting is subsidiary to the fact of voting, which is the opposite point to the one you intend.

[-] XraySonoCol@med-mastodon.com -3 points 1 year ago

@frankPodmore Only if you assume that my intention is to make good on the threat.

[-] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 year ago

It's not much of a threat if you don't, is it?

this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
43 points (79.5% liked)

UK Politics

3066 readers
127 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS