Keir Starmer Labour Leader

I mean, it's clear to me that Starmer is following the Blair handbook of cosying up to Murdoch and other elites in exchange for more favourable press coverage. Labour are selling themselves out again just as they did in the nineties. Maybe it's their only path to power?
 
I mean, it's clear to me that Starmer is following the Blair handbook of cosying up to Murdoch and other elites in exchange for more favourable press coverage. Labour are selling themselves out again just as they did in the nineties. Maybe it's their only path to power?
Seems the price is higher this time around as well.
 
I mean, it's clear to me that Starmer is following the Blair handbook of cosying up to Murdoch and other elites in exchange for more favourable press coverage. Labour are selling themselves out again just as they did in the nineties. Maybe it's their only path to power?

Thanks to the complete collapse of The Tories, they were already miles ahead, and, arguably, could have done it without them. While Blair embraced the filthy Australian, at least he came to power with a sense of optimism. Starmer is offering nothing but continuity. No electoral reform, no public services reform, no tax reform and no energy reform. Nothing.
 
:lol:

Starmer seeing a buy 1 get 1 free deal in Greggs

oppenheimer-1.jpg

I'm not sure Starmer is against a 2-4-1 at Greggs. Have you seen the size his entire head has ballooned to since 2019? If you want an example of growth, this one is stunning.
 
They're not even asking to stop drilling in existing oil fields anyway which makes the headline and Starmer's comment ridiculous. They just want the new licences revoked.
 
Heh. So you don't take "elements" of the left seriously because they insult you, the rest you don't take seriously because of their actual positions.

No matter how right the Tories move that Overton window there you shall drag your deckchair so as to still see the sun. Serious thinker Nickm, astonishingly, after 15 years of its abject failure still thinks austerity is the only viable policy. Any argument that might add 2% to the National Debt is by contrast, deeply unserious and unworthy of discussion.

I don't think anyone should be too concerned by what you consider serious fella.

Well you seem a little triggered. Ok, I'll say it directly maybe I'll get another entertaining response: You live a fantasy. Truss bombs the economy and forces up the cost of debt servicing because she thought she could keep borrowing and spending at will. She also made her case as being about growth. But it made no difference. The markets decided they did not want to fund it.

Yet all that is waved away because it is inconvenient. The funding of a 10% gap in a higher interest rate world where we owe 100 per cent of GDP, is apparently immaterial to political choices available to Labour. Pointing out this reality means I am bad.

Yeah you are no better than the people on the right wing of the tories who think reality can similarly be wished away. I don't take them seriously, and I don't take you seriously, for the same reason.

Right, let see how that lands.
 
Last edited:
Well you seem a little triggered. Ok, I'll say it directly maybe I'll get another entertaining response: You live a fantasy. Truss bombs the economy and forces up the cost of debt servicing because she thought she could keep borrowing and spending at will. She also made her case as being about growth. But it made no difference.

Yet all that is waved away because it is inconvenient. The funding of a 10% gap is immaterial to political choices available. Pointing out this reality is bad.

You are no better than the people on the right wing of the tories who think reality can be wished away. I don't take them seriously, and I don't take you seriously, for the same reason.

Right, let see how that lands.
This is what having zero principles looks like.
 
If you want to know why people don't trust the Corbyn wing of labour in elections, just read the replies to my recent posts. They never ever learn.
 
Truss bombs the economy and forces up the cost of debt servicing because she thought she could keep borrowing and spending at will. She also made her case as being about growth. But it made no difference. The markets decided they did not want to fund it.

It’s a bit disingenuous to say that the markets reacted the way they did to Truss and Kwarteng’s budget just because it was borrowing money when our debt is already high.

They wanted to borrow £45 billion to fund tax cuts, predominantly for the wealthiest. They didn’t even let the OBR assess their plans in advance of announcing the budget, as is usual practice. That concerned the markets because they know that isn’t a recipe for growth.

It seems like you are trying to argue the markets would have reacted the same way if the borrowing was for investment initiatives to help growth.
 
If you want to know why people don't trust the Corbyn wing of labour in elections, just read the replies to my recent posts. They never ever learn.
Meanwhile you're happily cheering Tory policies because it says Labour next to the name of the guy fronting them. Maybe you're actually a Tory, huh?
 
Sorry, read this as they support his proposal? At this point anything Starmer related is just fodder for people to make stuff up.
June - Starmer said he would block any new gas and oil exploration. This got the backing from progressive groups.

July - The tories announce plans for new gas and oil exploration

August - Starmer say Labour would not revoke any existing gas and oil licenses.
 
June - Starmer said he would block any new gas and oil exploration. This got the backing from progressive groups.

July - The tories announce plans for new gas and oil exploration

August - Starmer say Labour would not revoke any existing gas and oil licenses.
Not sure what the problem is with any of these, Starmer is saying what Labour will do if they were in power

He's saying they won't grant any new ones and won't cancel any existing ones, the ones the Tories are granting will be existing ones by the time Labour gets in
 
Another pledge gone
F26Squ2W8AA8AKS



F26dKUUXAAA0lZ9

I just see it as an establishment handover. Look at the frame.

Ban new oil and gas licences
Rely 100% on imports
Protect Russian jobs
Risk UK security

Starmer will then, knowingly, say that he is not "protecting Russian jobs", will diversify (look at all available options) when it comes to oil and gas, and therefore protect UK security. And then people will say, Starmer has betrayed the climate cause (just stop oil). After which, what? Someone else will say, "he doesn't really mean any of it, he just has to say these things because the country is so far right-wing". Predictable clownshow nonsense.



Called it (three weeks ago).
 
Shitty move distancing himself from the Mayor in London regarding the ULEZ expansion.
 
I’ve soured on him massively in the last few months. The man is a fraud.
 
I’ve soured on him massively in the last few months. The man is a fraud.

Yep, pretty much. He's so scared of potential attack lines from the Tories and right wing media that he is terrified to actually stand for anything at all.

I'd have totally disregarded him and forgotten about his idiocy in any system other than FPTP. Idiot.
 
Yep, pretty much. He's so scared of potential attack lines from the Tories and right wing media that he is terrified to actually stand for anything at all.

I'd have totally disregarded him and forgotten about his idiocy in any system other than FPTP. Idiot.
It’s crazy. What if the Tories attack you? They’re the ones in government ffs! This mess is theirs.
 


Could be something of a trend

20% turnout and she won with 318 votes so the percentages are almost redundant. I can’t find anything out about her online which suggests she’s probably a Tory candidate they’ve white labelled to make more competitive.