-
But that’s only true if they both lie, which is my point- if Labour don’t lie but Johnson continues too then Labour would have to present an austerity budget whilst Johnson spends money like water.
Dammit-
But that’s only true if they both lie, which is my point- if Labour don’t lie but Johnson continues too then Labour would have to present an austerity budget whilst Johnson spends money like water.
The Silver lining of this election result (personally) is the Conservatives get to own the disaster of Brexit (an entirely right wing invention). Or at least, some people will see it as this. Sadly Brexit may pile us into such dark times of individualism and intolerance history will be 'revised'. Brexit will be seen as a response to Tony Blair's immigration policy in the same way I hear the 2007 global economic crash was the result Gordon Brown's mismanagement.
Whatever the economic prospects of Brexit, the public didn't generally believe we'll disappear down a black hole and you certainly can't campaign telling people that. Corbyn's Labour were widely accused of lying, even when they tried to present the full, costed truth. So I'm suggesting Labour only needed to be on the right-side of the tories - less dishonest. Labour (this election and before) were perceived by the voter to lack fiscal credibility, so actually had more to gain (than the tories) by having a modest spending plan. It would have even married well with the pre-existing narrative of Boris as reckless chancer (if you wanted to go down that route).
Labour could have still been the relatively high spending government, because they had tax plans that should bring more revenue.
miro_o
The intellectual battle for the end of austerity has been won. In a hypothetical Labour-leave election (and assuming equal levels of trust) Cons & Lab spending ability are on a level playing field. That's not a problem.