Keir Starmer Labour Leader

jeff_goldblum said:
Not really, mortgage holidays shift the payment backwards meaning your payments remain the same but they go on for longer. Rent deferrals mean your future payments increase to cover the period you weren't paying rent for.
Click to expand...
yes and no... most people dont have a mortgage they intend to keep for full term (normally you have a discounted rate you shift before going onto standard variable rate) - you will have to catch up the payments, pay a lump sum or take out a larger mortgage (and this make higher payments on that) to pay it off and move products

so as a homeowner you will ultimately have to
pay more ongoing to catch up
save up and pay a lump sum
take out finance for the lump sum and pay it off
OR face the penalty of much higher variable rates

As a renter you will ultimately have to
pay more ongoing to catch up
save up and pay a lump sum
take out finance for the lump sum
 
EwanI Ted said:
The tweet was by a well known lefty blogger who last I checked was a Labour member, so not sure where you're going there.
Click to expand...

Funny how unity is now key to success. The left of the party have much kinder to Starmer than the right was to Corbyn.
 
Shamwow said:
Funny how unity is now key to success. The left of the party have much kinder to Starmer than the right was to Corbyn.
Click to expand...

Both sides are hypocrites who never really cared about party unity and just used the term as a weapon in their factional fallings out. It’s just that the old right got shown up for this years ago, the left is just proving this now.
 
EwanI Ted said:
The tweet was by a well known lefty blogger who last I checked was a Labour member, so not sure where you're going there.
Click to expand...

I'll take your word on the guy being a well-known lefty Labour blogger, never heard of the guy personally.

It's just a bit laughable - after a unprecedented five-year campaign of factional shithousery, including party officials and sitting MPs taking advantage of their positions, access and offices to undermine the party they represent, people are turning round and claiming that some guy (not an MP or party official) posting a critique of Labour Party policy on a blog (not a Labour-affiliated blog) is outrageous factionalism and beyond the pale.
 
EwanI Ted said:
Both sides are hypocrites who never really cared about party unity and just used the term as a weapon in their factional fallings out. It’s just that the old right got shown up for this years ago, the left is just proving this now.
Click to expand...
feck this both sides bs. It's simply not true.
 
jeff_goldblum said:
I'll take your word on the guy being a well-known lefty Labour blogger, never heard of the guy personally.

It's just a bit laughable - after a unprecedented five-year campaign of factional shithousery, including party officials and sitting MPs taking advantage of their positions, access and offices to undermine the party they represent, people are turning round and claiming that some guy (not an MP or party official) posting a critique of Labour Party policy on a blog (not a Labour-affiliated blog) is outrageous factionalism and beyond the pale.
Click to expand...
It's not even his blog, he is just posting a link to the website.

Here's the original tweet



I just posted the lefty blogger tweet because it was the first thing that pop up on my feed. It's bizarre that anyone thinks this is a ''lefty'' attack on Starmer.
 
jeff_goldblum said:
I'll take your word on the guy being a well-known lefty Labour blogger, never heard of the guy personally.

It's just a bit laughable - after a unprecedented five-year campaign of factional shithousery, including party officials and sitting MPs taking advantage of their positions, access and offices to undermine the party they represent, people are turning round and claiming that some guy (not an MP or party official) posting a critique of Labour Party policy on a blog (not a Labour-affiliated blog) is outrageous factionalism and beyond the pale.
Click to expand...

If the attacks on Starmer were limited to this single tweet that would be a fair argument. But they're not.

As I said above, I'm not defending Labour's right here, who as you say, have engaged in full on shithousery. I didn't even vote for Starmer, who I think only won because he was a tall white male. But I do think he deserves a chance and expected that he'd get a bit of grace period. The speed at which Corbyn's various outriders and online supporters have turned against Starmer for basically no reason other than not being Corbyn has been a surprise.
 
EwanI Ted said:
If the attacks on Starmer were limited to this single tweet that would be a fair argument. But they're not.

As I said above, I'm not defending Labour's right here, who as you say, have engaged in full on shithousery. I didn't even vote for Starmer, who I think only won because he was a tall white male. But I do think he deserves a chance and expected that he'd get a bit of grace period. The speed at which Corbyn's various outriders and online supporters have turned against Starmer for basically no reason other than not being Corbyn has been a surprise.
Click to expand...
has it been a surprise? this man was going to appoint emily notrots as his most senior staff member despite the internal report showing her as one of the key figures in undermining the labour party

i'm not voting for the labour party if those people aren't purged, and if the MPs who undermined the left remain on his shadow cabinet.
 
EwanI Ted said:
If the attacks on Starmer were limited to this single tweet that would be a fair argument. But they're not.

As I said above, I'm not defending Labour's right here, who as you say, have engaged in full on shithousery. I didn't even vote for Starmer, who I think only won because he was a tall white male. But I do think he deserves a chance and expected that he'd get a bit of grace period. The speed at which Corbyn's various outriders and online supporters have turned against Starmer for basically no reason other than not being Corbyn has been a surprise.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you think it's been a surprise, was predictable long before Starmer was elected leader that Corbynites would turn on anyone who wasn't RLB.
 
EwanI Ted said:
Both sides are hypocrites who never really cared about party unity and just used the term as a weapon in their factional fallings out. It’s just that the old right got shown up for this years ago, the left is just proving this now.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about hypocrites, plenty of us made it quite clear we wouldn't vote Labour whilst Corbyn, McDonnell and Momentum were in power. How it will pan out now I've no idea but sod party unity, I'm all for a split.
 
sun_tzu said:
making the most of their window of opportunity before the EHRC eviscerate them and they get booted
Click to expand...
I see. So only the left of the Labour party (Jezbollah and Rebecca Wrong-Baiey, etc) will be proven antisemites ( as an aside, the only other party to have been investigated by the EHRC are the BNP, didn't you know Sun _Tzu)?
 
711 said:
I'm not sure about hypocrites, plenty of us made it quite clear we wouldn't vote Labour whilst Corbyn, McDonnell and Momentum were in power. How it will pan out now I've no idea but sod party unity, I'm all for a split.
Click to expand...
A split Labour party ensures Tory rule under first past the post for the foreseeable. Hopefully, Starmer can unite Labour into an effective left wing political force but just as you, and others, made it clear you wouldn't vote for a Labour parry led by the left, many will not vote for one led by the right of the party (look at the collapse of Labour vote in Scotland under Blair for an example of this). A Labour party disintegrating into factions is a disaster for the UK.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
A split Labour party ensures Tory rule under first past the post for the foreseeable. Hopefully, Starmer can unite Labour into an effective left wing political force but just as you, and others, made it clear you wouldn't vote for a Labour parry led by the left, many will not vote for one led by the right of the party (look at the collapse of Labour vote in Scotland under Blair for an example of this). A Labour party disintegrating into factions is a disaster for the UK.
Click to expand...
the labour party has had plenty of chances to change the electoral system, and ignored it's own manifesto at times to keep fptp, the eternal tory rule will come primarily as a result of their own incompetence, greed and corruption

the threats of "fptp, only options etc" that will certainly come from labour at the next GE are only true because a majority of the people who most often make it to the upper echelons of politics are corrupt and want to maintain the power that this system gives them and their class
 
Fingeredmouse said:
I see. So only the left of the Labour party (Jezbollah and Rebecca Wrong-Baiey, etc) will be proven antisemites ( as an aside, the only other party to have been investigated by the EHRC are the BNP, didn't you know Sun _Tzu)?
Click to expand...
thats not true - they are the only other party who were initially investigated where the evidence passed the test that it was in the balance of probability likely that criminal discrimination had taken place and that insufficient internal steps had been taken to improve it and that prosecution if found guilty was likely to be in the public interest... hence a formal investigation was started
Its a pretty high bar tbf

 
Last edited:
Fingeredmouse said:
A split Labour party ensures Tory rule under first past the post for the foreseeable. Hopefully, Starmer can unite Labour into an effective left wing political force but just as you, and others, made it clear you wouldn't vote for a Labour parry led by the left, many will not vote for one led by the right of the party (look at the collapse of Labour vote in Scotland under Blair for an example of this). A Labour party disintegrating into factions is a disaster for the UK.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's Blair's fault. Nice one.
 
esmufc07 said:
I'm surprised you think it's been a surprise, was predictable long before Starmer was elected leader that Corbynites would turn on anyone who wasn't RLB.
Click to expand...

I suppose I just thought there would be at least some meaningful trigger point before we got there. Like whipping a certain way in a key vote like the Welfare Bill back in 2015. Or maybe ditching nationalisation of energy, or some other totemic policy. But, yeah, guess I was wrong.
 
EwanI Ted said:
I suppose I just thought there would be at least some meaningful trigger point before we got there. Like whipping a certain way in a key vote like the Welfare Bill back in 2015. Or maybe ditching nationalisation of energy, or some other totemic policy. But, yeah, guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...

We haven't gotten to how 10% of how badly Corbyn was treated yet, and yous are already complaining like it's worse.

I'm a Starmer supporter who voted for Starmer and I think it couldn't be clearer that he's had a much easier ride from the left than what Corbyn got from the right (from the very top of the party let's not forget) on day 1.
 
esmufc07 said:
I'm surprised you think it's been a surprise, was predictable long before Starmer was elected leader that Corbynites would turn on anyone who wasn't RLB.
Click to expand...

This sort of thing is demonstrably nonsense though, if 'Corbynites' as a block wanted RLB to win she would have won. The reason Starmer has his mandate is because a massive number of people who voted for Corbyn in 2015 and 2017 gave him the benefit of the doubt.

Undoubtedly there are some who will trash Starmer regardless because they wanted RLB, but claiming that all the left are of that ilk, or that all criticism of Starmer from the left is inherently disingenuous, is just the same old condescending reductionist shit that many on the centre/right of the party have been spouting about the left since Corbyn got on the ballot.
 
It's very cute to see those who denied any such agenda against Corbyn now pretend there's a campaign against Starmer over absolutely nothing :lol:

The pettiness of it is just brilliant.
 
Shamwow said:
We haven't gotten to how 10% of how badly Corbyn was treated yet, and yous are already complaining like it's worse.

I'm a Starmer supporter who voted for Starmer and I think it couldn't be clearer that he's had a much easier ride from the left than what Corbyn got from the right (from the very top of the party let's not forget) on day 1.
Click to expand...

Obviously Corbyn got more criticism in 5 years than Starmer has in 3 weeks. The point is that it’s started sooner than I expected.
 
EwanI Ted said:
Obviously Corbyn got more criticism in 5 years than Starmer has in 3 weeks. The point is that it’s started sooner than I expected.
Click to expand...

Bloody hell you are being disengenuous today aren't you. Corbyn got more on day one of his leadership than Starmer has had in 3 weeks. Try not to intentionally misread it this time.
 
Shamwow said:
Bloody hell you are being disengenuous today aren't you. Corbyn got more on day one of his leadership than Starmer has had in 3 weeks. Try not to intentionally misread it this time.
Click to expand...
tbf if Starmer had tea with hezbollah perhaps he would have got the same criticism
Or if Starmer was particularly known for voting against a party he now was in charge of
etc etc etc
 
sun_tzu said:
tbf if Starmer had tea with hezbollah perhaps he would have got the same criticism
Or if Starmer was particularly known for voting against a party he now was in charge of
etc etc etc
Click to expand...

At least you're trying to justify it rather than pretend it never happened.
 
I mean obviously there's an agenda against Starmer, just as there was obviously an agenda against Corbyn. You're not going to be Labour leader without some people having an agenda against you, it comes with the territory. The question is how the politician in question deals with it and how it impacts Labour's electoral chances.
 
EwanI Ted said:
If the attacks on Starmer were limited to this single tweet that would be a fair argument. But they're not.

As I said above, I'm not defending Labour's right here, who as you say, have engaged in full on shithousery. I didn't even vote for Starmer, who I think only won because he was a tall white male. But I do think he deserves a chance and expected that he'd get a bit of grace period. The speed at which Corbyn's various outriders and online supporters have turned against Starmer for basically no reason other than not being Corbyn has been a surprise.
Click to expand...

Who are these Corbyn 'outriders' who have turned against Starmer? Genuine question. I imagine I follow a fair few on social media who you'd class in that category and I've not seen a single one 'turn against' Starmer. In fact I've been pleasantly surprised at the equitable treatment he's largely received so far from many commentators who were fully behind Corbyn.
 
BobbyManc said:
Who are these Corbyn 'outriders' who have turned against Starmer? Genuine question. I imagine I follow a fair few on social media who you'd class in that category and I've not seen a single one 'turn against' Starmer. In fact I've been pleasantly surprised at the equitable treatment he's largely received so far from many commentators who were fully behind Corbyn.
Click to expand...

Can't quite be bothered to trawl since its tea time, but the Canary are doing headlines like Kier Starmer has already thrown disabled people under the bus & people like Aaron Bastani are tweeting nothing but complaints about Starmer, often over the tinniest things.
 
EwanI Ted said:
As I said above, I'm not defending Labour's right here, who as you say, have engaged in full on shithousery. I didn't even vote for Starmer, who I think only won because he was a tall white male. But I do think he deserves a chance and expected that he'd get a bit of grace period. The speed at which Corbyn's various outriders and online supporters have turned against Starmer for basically no reason other than not being Corbyn has been a surprise.
Click to expand...
Starmer got the job because party members and union affiliates weren't convinced RLB or Nandy were viable. Had more to do with his record and general presence as a litigating type than being a tall white male. Probably his career as a lawyer and performance in Brexit debates. The reason he's been criticised is because he has yet to address the issue of prominent Labour figures conspiring to destroy Labour from the inside. It's not going away.
 
EwanI Ted said:
Can't quite be bothered to trawl since its tea time, but the Canary are doing headlines like Kier Starmer has already thrown disabled people under the bus & people like Aaron Bastani are tweeting nothing but complaints about Starmer, often over the tinniest things.
Click to expand...

I mean the Canary was never going to endorse Starmer so that's not exactly newsworthy; Starmer would be more concerned if they had done. Moreover, while the headline is distasteful and sensationalist, it does raise a valid point and it links to its earlier articles under Corbyn where it explicitly criticised him for his own shortcomings on championing disability rights. So, awful headline aside, I think it's misleading to see it as part of an agenda against Starmer, rather a continuation of its critique of Labour policies in that sphere.
As for Bastani, it comes down to what you'd define as the tiniest things. I've not seen anything I'd define as unjust or spurious against Starmer. I'd class his tweets as the kind of scrutiny and legitimate criticisms/concerns you'd expect from a commentator further to the left of Starmer. Most of it centres on the Labour leaks which are of the utmost importance when it comes to the party right now.
 
sun_tzu said:
thats not true - they are the only other party who were initially investigated where the evidence passed the test that it was in the balance of probability likely that criminal discrimination had taken place and that insufficient internal steps had been taken to improve it and that prosecution if found guilty was likely to be in the public interest... hence a formal investigation was started
Its a pretty high bar tbf

Click to expand...

Yes. I have read your several hundred metronomic posts on the matter.
 
TheGame said:
Fully agree, man got away with a crime and somehow ends up with a blue tick on Twitter which gives him more ammunition to sprout nonsense.
Click to expand...

" In July, Grimes won an appeal against his fine. He had raised over £90,000 through crowdfunding for his legal costs.[17] The court ordered the Electoral Commission to pay for his legal costs."

Just for balance.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
" In July, Grimes won an appeal against his fine. He had raised over £90,000 through crowdfunding for his legal costs.[17] The court ordered the Electoral Commission to pay for his legal costs."

Just for balance.
Click to expand...

He got away with it on a technicality, it was plain to see how he was supporting Vote Leave through BeLeave. Yes he won the appeal but if you read the full judgement, you can see it wasn’t black and white. Still an odious individual.
 
TheGame said:
Fully agree, man got away with a crime and somehow ends up with a blue tick on Twitter which gives him more ammunition to sprout nonsense.
Click to expand...
TheGame said:
He got away with it on a technicality, it was plain to see how he was supporting Vote Leave through BeLeave. Yes he won the appeal but if you read the full judgement, you can see it wasn’t black and white. Still an odious individual.
Click to expand...

an odious not guilty individual? or are you libeling him as a criminal on a public forum (when he has a £90k legal fund ready to go)
 
sun_tzu said:
an odious not guilty individual? or are you libeling him as a criminal on a public forum (when he has a £90k legal fund ready to go)
Click to expand...

£90k fund ready to go, who are you his spokesperson? I already said he was found not guilty but the circumstances are not cut and dry as with any legal cases.He was found not guilty because the fine set by the EC for the offence was too high.
The judge said the following ‘He added that even if Grimes had committed the offence, it would not have justified the fine of £20,000, the maximum possible under current law.’

And he argued he was confused by a form. Now he’s riding on the fame of it and classes himself as a political commentator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.