Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
to be fair Bobby is quite the starmer fanboi and hes going to be supporting starmer all the way i think
This very much key (in my opinion), whilst Starmer is more 'moderate' he is still at heart perhaps seen by the 'red wall' voters as too much of a Lib DEM in his true beliefs.
Currently the Lib Dem's are all over the place and with the right 'planned journey' ('of a thousand miles') and taking his first steps very carefully, Starmer could bring about; first a coalition to challenge the Tories, at the next GE then, if such a coalition dents the 80 seat Tory Majority and brings them back within range, he would seal the deal with an amalgamation and the formation of a new Social Democratic (Peoples)Party that fights the GE after ,with a real chance of victory.
At the moment this perhaps seems overly optimistic I agree, but as I said in my previous post, the Country desperately needs (or will need in 2024) someone who can raise the spirits get away from doom and gloom outlooks, forms new alliances that people believe 'could' work. The Lib Dems are a bit like the Marie-celeste just now and desperately need some one, probably from outside the party but who is a seen as a kindred spirit, to come and grab the wheel and get out the 'political sexton'!
Perhaps the unpalatable truth is that in its current format Labour cannot find 326 seats. The word 'Labour' (except for the extreme left) is no longer synonymous in a political sense with being able to convince enough working people it should be in power (except perhaps in Wales, but certainly not, as you pointed out, in Scotland).
As I said earlier the Old all embracing Labour Movement is dead, time to bury the Party name also....perhaps??
Last edited:
Claudia Webbe has been charged with harassment: https://news.sky.com/story/leiceste...arged-with-harassment-against-female-12084430
Interesting to see how this is dealt with by LOTO if she is convicted. Very unlikely it will lead to a custodial sentence so recall won't be an option.
Interesting to see how this is dealt with by LOTO if she is convicted. Very unlikely it will lead to a custodial sentence so recall won't be an option.
Suspension (expulsion if convicted) and withdrawal of the whip is standard, I think.
Technically I think recall could be an option if enough constituents signed a petition regardless if innocent or guilty
I believe all details are embargoed to ensure a fair trial so LOTO probably wont have to make a formal decision to make for a while - suspension in the meantime would seem probable I'd guess
Whilst I agree with this in general (and can't foresee myself not voting Labour for the foreseeable future, under any leader) This kind of stuff is so asinine and counter productive. And I said the same thing when the Left were trying to vote-shame the centre under Corbyn too...Votes have to be won.
If Starmer's camp have decided to triangulate their strategy for the purpose of winning back Tory voters at the expense of the young and left leaning, then thats a decision they've taken - and that's perfectly valid as a tactic.. but it's success or failure will rest with him, as it did Corbyn. You don't get to blame the voters who weren't won round, or felt they had moral objections.. Especially after 4 years of Centrists throwing all sorts of tantrums at the very idea of having to actually comprise on anything, or make a tough, uncomfortable decision against their moral judgment for the purpose of opposing a Conservative government/Hard Brexit.... You know, all the things I was always taught grown up politics was actually about?
Shying away from outwardly opposing things that might scare off bigoted little Englanders, like, you know, legalising war crimes! (sure, we're doing that now, Go 2020!) is a viable tactic... and a sound one if it works... But the people who spent 4 years screaming bloody murder about capitulating to anything other than a wholesale reversal of Brexit (a tactic which unquestionably only radicalised Leave voters, including those in the Red Wall, further) and wanked themselves into a stupor as James OBrien took down yet another mumbling pleb, don't get to say fecking shit about it when people on the Left criticise it.
Similarly, tactically dismissing the concerns of swathes of the black community in favour of siding with the police over BLM is an understandable appeal to Law & Order politics, and an obvious gambit for a Labour leader following Corbyn...And it's fine... But the people who gleefully hand-wrung over Labour's antisemitism issues or decided they were enough to prohibit them from voting for them whilst the Tories were (and I always feel I need to capitalise this for emphasis) ACTUALLY DEPORTING BLACK PEOPLE!! - and who conveniently disappear whenever issues surrounding the concerns of, or decline in POC membership under Starmer arise... Again, don't get to say diddly pip about the Left's inabilities to put aside their own personal moral qualms for the sake of the lesser evil.
And if they've decided that doing nothing at all to overtly rock the boat, whilst an incompetent Tory government kills thousands with only Andy Burnham and Marcus Rashford to hold them at bay, with the view that another election is so far off, it's tactically beneficial to lay low until closer to.... then cool... but by the same token, the people who quite correctly screamed bloody murder about Corbyn's inability to hold a shambolic government to account should, at the very very least, see the irony?
In America, the Left is being blamed for selfishly not voting for Clinton, and potentially not voting for Biden, whilst the same people here blame the left for selfishly fielding a candidate that wasn’t good enough to convince Centrists to vote for!... Both things can’t be true. And really, it shouldn't be too much to ask for a bit of fecking consistency!
Because otherwise, the rationale comes across a tad like "I have a right to an opinion, and a moral stance, and a red line... But you're a selfish, stupid, politically naive non-person for having different ones, and your personal agency is invalid."... Which is ironic, considering how often the ideologue label is thrown at the Left, and how only a few months ago Centrists were arguing (myself included) that that kind of attitude doesn't win any votes!
Politics should be grown up and difficult, and you do have vote for things you don't like. And I both voted Starmer for leader, and will happily vote for him for PM... But I sure as hell won't be told that I can't antagonise the kind of arrogant, cowardly, politically coddled, shit heeled middle management Centrists who've done nothing but smugly dismiss how their brand of neoliberal politics has helped cause the situation we're in... Blindly obsess over the fecking Olympics as a halcyon time despite the riots and austerity... Couped at every opportunity without any semblance of what a reasonable alternative would actually be (Angela Eagle!! Owen Smith!! ...Chukka!!? Oh why won't they vote for us!!??) and in the process of trying to consistently overturn the democratic elections they disagreed with, only manage to cement the idea of a "Liberal Elite" in the minds of both the right and left, play slap bang into the machinations of Cummings et al, and then absolutely absolve themselves of any and all blame, because they could conveniently point at Corbyn as somehow at root fault for ALL of it instead!.. Then endlessly whinge about abuse just for being called Centrist, whilst happily normalising hatred against the Left as cranks or loonies or radicals - to the point where Leftist journalists and Labour door steppers have been beaten in the street - and consistently blame the young, who will inevitably be the biggest victims in all this, likely to become even more radicalised and left leaning as their progression into adulthood prohibits them from ever owning property or attaining long term job security (the kind of things that allowed New Labour to garner support amongst the upwardly mobile) but who are still viewed as completely expendable by the property owning liberal class - who will then inevitably turn around and blame them again for being selfish and idealistic should all these triangulated tactics not actually bare any fruit....and worst of all... sin of all sins... after all of it, voted for the fecking Lib Dems!!
And if they have a problem with that... then they should bloody well grow up.
But I'll definitely still vote Labour.
Right, now that's off my chest, I'm going to block to Caf for a month and actually do something productive!
Last edited:
Yeah, nice try but not even close. Where does that state I think Starmer is unelectable?
Thanks for going out of your way to scour through my posts to show that I did once have respect for Starmer and was completely open to the prospect of his leadership, and it’s only the fact he’s since reneged on his pledges and made clear his interests do not align with the underprivileged that he no longer has my backing. Much appreciated
I was tempted to write tldr.
But I did read it, and actually you make many very valid points in this post.
Unsure what @sun_tzu was trying to achieve but he sure put a lot of effort in.Yeah, nice try but not even close. Where does that state I think Starmer is unelectable?
Thanks for going out of your way to scour through my posts to show that I did once have respect for Starmer and was completely open to the prospect of his leadership, and it’s only the fact he’s since reneged on his pledges and made clear his interests do not align with the underprivileged that he no longer has my backing. Much appreciated
it shows you started with an open mind about Starmer, as many did, including me, but one by one the pledges made by him are being made to look like absolute BS.
Man, imagine changing your opinion on someone. And doing so after they showed that you had the wrong impression of them? Damn, you must feel really embarrassed.Yeah, nice try but not even close. Where does that state I think Starmer is unelectable?
Thanks for going out of your way to scour through my posts to show that I did once have respect for Starmer and was completely open to the prospect of his leadership, and it’s only the fact he’s since reneged on his pledges and made clear his interests do not align with the underprivileged that he no longer has my backing. Much appreciated
I was close to deleting my account in shame when he exposed me for changing my opinion on someone in light of new evidence.
A quite incredible post from him really. Really proves that this isn't some kind of left wing plot to undermine Starmer. I feel most people started with an open mind on him but he's done nothing but feck that position up.
Indeed, in the third post he quoted I even basically admitted I was doubtful of Starmer’s sincerity and yet would still back him, but he’s pretty much gone mask off already. The sad thing is the posts do substantiate the fact that Starmer did have a fair bit of goodwill on the left, and many of them voted for him based on his platform, and he’s not even giving them sops.
I'm still not sure what he was trying to accomplish, aside from making himself look bad.
That’s pretty much his MO.
Yeah, nice try but not even close. Where does that state I think Starmer is unelectable?
Thanks for going out of your way to scour through my posts to show that I did once have respect for Starmer and was completely open to the prospect of his leadership, and it’s only the fact he’s since reneged on his pledges and made clear his interests do not align with the underprivileged that he no longer has my backing. Much appreciated
Yeah very confused by that post. So..you were willing to give a new leader some time and the benefit of the doubt, despite being from a different political wing than yourself. He so far has not loved up to your expectations of what a labour leader should stand for. So you are now unhappy with him and have changed your mind, after seeing the evidence presented by Starmer...
Is it a bad thing to change your mind now?
Really excellent post and I say this as someone who will vote for Starmer in the next GE (or whoever labour put up really, just as I did with Corbyn and Miliband etc before) just to get the scum out.
Man the Tories really do see students as disposable don't they? Talk about ensuring a generation absolutely hates you. Surely the knighted gimp can't feck thi...
As you were.
As you were.
@Mockney
Worth noting that the NEC claimed after the report that you posted that membership has gone up under Starmer, including BAME membership.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/keir-starmer-labour-membership-88370
Worth noting that the NEC claimed after the report that you posted that membership has gone up under Starmer, including BAME membership.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/keir-starmer-labour-membership-88370
The BAME membership point is very misleading as they did not collect data on that for membership until recently (under Formby I think) when it became explicitly asked for, so obviously the BAME membership will be seen to be rising as they’re now ensuring it is recorded - also means for those leaving who joined prior to that they typically won’t have a clue of their ethnicity.
This is an interesting and useful step. As I said, I’d be amazed if it’s Starmer v Johnson in 2024. But the difference is if they want to take on Sunak they’re going to need to offer more than bland soundbites and competency.
personally, I think Johnson will be gone sometime next year. Bear in mind, the coronavirus handling, Brexit coming up, and there are local elections, don't be suprised if they Tories and right wing media choose to dump Johnson. Recently Sunak has received positive news from the likes of the Mail and Express, whilst the Mail recently has been more critical of Johnson over the last few weeks.
I thought this quote was a pisstake at first. Where has our humanity gone? The amount of centrists I’ve seen critiquing the plan on financial grounds is disturbing, as if there was some financial sense behind it then sending refugees to some island thousands of miles away for processing would in anyway be an option.
Don’t even think they’ll need to dump him, he’ll go willingly. Not up for the work required and he’ll prefer the money he can make scratching his arse and writing crap in newspapers again.
It's the perfect example of what I was saying earlier about Labour in government being so amoral that the party (and certainly the centre/right of the party)'s ability to take the moral high ground is shot forever.
This policy is literally something New Labour considered and set aside because of the expense. Even if Starmer wanted to critique the policy on moral grounds (jury's out on whether this Labour hates asylum seekers or not), he can't with any credibility without throwing half the PLP under the bus.
You think so? I don't. This is the sort of thing political obsessives think about and nobody else does. Hardly anyone can recall when New Labour was last in power, it was so long ago. Besides Starmer gets a fresh start in this regard, he gets to define the party he wants Labour to be, or what's the point of having a new leader.
The statement said inhumane...
Do you actually know what Starmer achieved before he became a MP?
corbyn led a campaign against apartheid in the early 80s and a post here last week said (and i'm quoting directly) that his response to coronavirus would be to pogrom jews.
I think he's being quite clever supporting the government on a lot of things. Aligns himself with the people in power and pick his battles carefully. Nobody likes an opposition leader that just complains and objects for the sake of it Ala Corbyn.
He worked with the police in Northern Ireland.
Edit: Just to be clear, my point is that his career, especially recently is, working alongside law enforcement and the establishment. Not the maverick human rights lawyer that his leadership campaign portrayed.
And the statement should have left it at inhumane. Instead, he introduced a financial aspect to it, which is incredibly unhelpful and reinforces a narrative around refugees that is already disturbing. If a government considered plans for concentration camps, you’d raise your eyebrows if an MP said ‘it’s inhumane and financially it doesn’t make sense’. It’s a bizarre point to add on that suggests a rather worrying worldview.
Yes, I’m aware of Starmer’s past. Unlike you I assume, I don’t deify him because of it.
Perception wise I agree. Corbyn was the boy who cried wolf. He opposed everything, and then when he had valid arguments they never stood out, because that’s what he always did.
Eh? Criticising a proposal as being bad whichever way you look at it is a worrying worldview now? This is a big reach.
I’m sorry, but there are posters in this threadwho are spinning it as if the statement emphasizes the cost over the human rights aspect. This is completely miss leading.
A lovely woman, if a little controlling.
I don't want to be rude but there's a section of labour that has to get over reflexively reaching for this kind of simplistic take. Calling something stupid AND cruel does not make the cruel less important.
Starmer needs people to agree with him for a range of reasons on issues like this. It is, sadly in today's world, not sufficient to appeal to people's moral sensibilities when it comes to immigration, because too many don't have any. You have to appeal to their reason too, and given the country is haemorrhaging cash at the moment, it doesn't seem unreasonable to point out it's a fecking dumb waste of money (as well as being nasty).
Last edited:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...johnson-has-lost-control-of-covid-19-pandemic
He makes a few points about the covid response and also his general strategy.
He makes a few points about the covid response and also his general strategy.
That he pre-emptively supported on Marr 72 hours before the latest batch of announcements.
Thankfully he's planning on sticking it to them this week by abstaining on another one of their bills.