Keir Starmer Labour Leader

Fluctuation0161 said:
So because they have been described as controversial by the Telegraph etc. you want don't this Jewish group to have a voice. OK.

My previous comment stands.
Click to expand...

so do you also support chris williamson?
Do you think there shouldn't be an independent review of anti-Semitic allegations in the labour party
do you think the IHRC definition of antisemitism shouldn't be used
do you think the antisemitism allegations against labour were just a smear on corbyn

or put simply how antisemitic are you?

also just to be clear LAW is not a "jewish group" and it is this members signature on an open letter from law (in which he supports williamson, is against inependent review of allegations, thinks the IHRC definition shouldn't be used and that the antisemitism allegations against labour were a Corbyn smear that has got him potentially kicked out the party - pending review of his response - in which I note he did not retract cy of those points)
 
Last edited:
Anyone against people who object to the British board of deputies should not be welcome in the Labour Party. The deputies leadership are right wing bigots.
 
sun_tzu said:
so do you also support chris williamson?
Do you think there shouldn't be an independent review of anti-Semitic allegations in the labour party
do you think the IHRC definition of antisemitism shouldn't be used
do you think the antisemitism allegations against labour were just a smear on corbyn

or put simply how antisemitic are you?

also just to be clear LAW is not a "jewish group" and it is this members signature on an open letter from law (in which he supports williamson, is against inependent review of allegations, thinks the IHRC definition shouldn't be used and that the antisemitism allegations against labour were a Corbyn smear that has got him potentially kicked out the party - pending review of his response - in which I note he did not retract cy of those points)
Click to expand...
The member is a political officer of Jewish Voice for Labour. So again, my initial point stands.

Maybe the question is, how anti semitic are you? Or do you only use it for political means when Guido tells you to.
 
sun_tzu said:
so do you also support chris williamson?
Do you think there shouldn't be an independent review of anti-Semitic allegations in the labour party
do you think the IHRC definition of antisemitism shouldn't be used
do you think the antisemitism allegations against labour were just a smear on corbyn

or put simply how antisemitic are you?

also just to be clear LAW is not a "jewish group" and it is this members signature on an open letter from law (in which he supports williamson, is against inependent review of allegations, thinks the IHRC definition shouldn't be used and that the antisemitism allegations against labour were a Corbyn smear that has got him potentially kicked out the party - pending review of his response - in which I note he did not retract cy of those points)
Click to expand...

There are loads of Jews who support these "far left" groups and don't accept that the IHRC definition of anti-Semitism is the only/correct one. But they're not the "right type of Jew" I suppose to support your point. Which would be quite anti-Semitic but there you go.
 
Drifter said:
Click to expand...

weren't the left adamant after the whole change uk thing that the morally and democratically decent thing was to stand down and trigger an election rather than change parties... I assume they will be here any moment now demanding the same?

Or perhaps they are too busy celebrating the first rumblings of the (much delayed) youthquake
 
sun_tzu said:
weren't the left adamant after the whole change uk thing that the morally and democratically decent thing was to stand down and trigger an election rather than change parties... I assume they will be here any moment now demanding the same?

Or perhaps they are too busy celebrating the first rumblings of the (much delayed) youthquake
Click to expand...
Jezbollah.
 
However, he said it had taught him a personal lesson that voters needed to be convinced that he was listening. “The big takeaways for me were that patience is wearing thin for the prime minister. If there’s one thing people don’t like, it’s when someone like the prime minister says one thing and then does another and they’ve just seen too much of that. “For Labour, what I was struck by was that people wanted to talk and wanted to engage. They were open to us. Now I’m not suggesting for a minute that people who voted Tory at the last election are already beginning to switch, but they’re open to that discussion … I think the constructive criticism is, can you show that you’ve changed? And probably the biggest takeaway, are you listening to me? Conference, obviously, will be our opportunity to set out in primary colours what post-pandemic Britain needs to look like.” Starmer signalled he may be preparing to make a more explicit departure from the 10 pledges he signed up to during his leadership campaign, which contained many policies backed by Jeremy Corbyn and earned him significant support from the left of the party. Pledges included abolishing tuition fees, increasing tax on the richest and backing “common ownership” of key utilities. Moving away from them will mean Starmer faces anger within his own ranks.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...int-a-picture-of-my-vision-in-primary-colours


images
 
esmufc07 said:
What does it mean to set out something in primary colours?
Click to expand...
Answer -


Labour pledged today to overhaul Universal Credit with a new name to end the “stigma” around the benefit. Welfare chief Jonathan Reynolds told the Mirror he will rebrand and “replace” the benefit if Labour wins power - two years after ex-leader Jeremy Corbyn said he would "scrap" it. Eight years after UC launched, Mr Reynolds said the “objective” of combining six benefits into one was “laudable” and the current IT system would stay - but the “whole culture needs to change”.

He also told the Mirror while he has “thought about a few” ideas for new names, the party has not settled on one yet. Mr Reynolds urged Tory rebels to help stop next month’s £20-a-week cut to Universal Credit for 6million people, which will hurl 500,000 into poverty. But quizzed by the Mirror, he stopped short of pledging a Labour government would reverse the cut - which ends an 18-month-long Covid uplift. Asked if he would restore the Universal Credit standard allowance back to what it is now - or indeed higher, due to inflation - Mr Reynolds replied: “Our opposition at the minute has to be around the cut that is scheduled for October because that’s the here and now, that’s the influence Parliament can have.
Click to expand...
 
711 said:
Good news, I wish this new party well.
Click to expand...
Just tried their website and was greeted by "This annoys us too, our website needs cookies in order to function correctly and the law requires us to display this pop up"..... what kind of breakthrough is this? A bit disappointing, I thought with their title they were going to go on the offensive!
 
There's something very grim and depressing about Starmer labour. Everything from policy to marketing looks as if it's from a Shane Medows film from the mid 2000's.

 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Wow. What a real, viable alternative to the Tories.
Click to expand...

Labour's not in any position to make pledges of that kind at the moment, and nor should they be until much, much closer to an election. That should be obvious.

Admittedly talking about playing with the name is asinine.
 
nickm said:
Labour's not in any position to make pledges of that kind at the moment, and nor should they be until much, much closer to an election. That should be obvious.

Admittedly talking about playing with the name is asinine.
Click to expand...
Without a vision, or even the start of a vision, there is no building towards any pledges or solid policy.

Starmer is in a position to break 10 pledges though. Funny that...

He still lies less than Johnson. But that only gives us the choice between sh*t on a stick or just sh*t.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Without a vision, or even the start of a vision, there is no building towards any pledges or solid policy.

Starmer is in a position to break 10 pledges though. Funny that...

He still lies less than Johnson. But that only gives us the choice between sh*t on a stick or just sh*t.
Click to expand...
I agree labour needs a vision and tbh there's a lot of low hanging fruit around. You don't need to promise an upending of society but you could say an awful lot about yourself with something understandable like housing for example... Thatcher did.
 
nickm said:
I agree labour needs a vision and tbh there's a lot of low hanging fruit around. You don't need to promise an upending of society but you could say an awful lot about yourself with something understandable like housing for example... Thatcher did.
Click to expand...
If only Starmer could be more like Thatcher.
 
Raven said:
If only Starmer could be more like Thatcher.
Click to expand...

Sigh. Yes, if only Starmer could learn some lessons about clarity of messaging from one of the best at it. Not the same as agreeing with or adopting her politics at all.

But I concede asking you lot to learn anything from anyone who's not been dead for 80 years is an ask.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
Sigh. Yes, if only Starmer could learn some lessons about clarity of messaging from one of the best at it. Not the same as agreeing with or adopting her politics at all.

But I concede asking you lot to learn anything from anyone who's not been dead for 80 years is an ask.
Click to expand...

Hitler's been dead for almost 80, you could ask them to learn from him. He was pretty clear.
 
NotThatSoph said:
Hitler's been dead for almost 80, you could ask them to learn from him. He was pretty clear.
Click to expand...
Think you just Godwinned yourself out of the thread there. But sure, let's compare how Thatcher used council house sales to tell a powerful story about aspiration to the working class, and by extension illustrated her political philosophy, and Hitler's burning of the Reichstag, and see how far that gets you.

This idea that understanding something is the same as agreeing with it, is childish.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
Think you just Godwinned yourself out of the thread there. But sure, let's compare how Thatcher used council house sales to tell a powerful story about aspiration to the working class, and by extension illustrated her political philosophy, and Hitler's burning of the Reichstag.

This idea that understanding something is the same as agreeing with it, is childish.
Click to expand...
:)

A clear case of e-suicide.
 
nickm said:
I agree labour needs a vision and tbh there's a lot of low hanging fruit around. You don't need to promise an upending of society but you could say an awful lot about yourself with something understandable like housing for example... Thatcher did.
Click to expand...
Social housing is what is needed. Not more unaffordable "affordable" private housing. Look at Germany as an example of a high proportion of renters.

Problem is the Tories are in bed with the big developers so they don't care about the housing shortage and its impact on the millions who are struggling. Only on profit for their developer donors. Likely similar to Thatcher.
 
nickm said:
Thatcher used council house sales to tell a powerful story about aspiration to the working class,
Click to expand...
Looking at the house price increases since then. How much money do you think Thatcher has lost the country in housing assets with this irresponsible policy?
 
nickm said:
Think you just Godwinned yourself out of the thread there. But sure, let's compare how Thatcher used council house sales to tell a powerful story about aspiration to the working class, and by extension illustrated her political philosophy, and Hitler's burning of the Reichstag, and see how far that gets you.

This idea that understanding something is the same as agreeing with it, is childish.
Click to expand...

Why would you compare? I thought we were talking about clearness without adopting the views.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.