Keir Starmer Labour Leader

[Sweet Square]

Starmer assisted and represented in European court Helen Steel, a women who was spied on by the British government(For criticizing McDonalds for under paying its workers and animal abuses)and tricked in having a long term relationship with an undercover police officer.

Real opposition indeed!

 

[Untied]

Also, again indicating the utter inconsistency, 2 frontbenchers resign their roles and it's nowhere to be seen on The Guardian front-page. That was the kind of story they featured above everything else for the past 5 years.

 

[Fingeredmouse]

Also, again indicating the utter inconsistency, 2 frontbenchers resign their roles and it's nowhere to be seen on The Guardian front-page. That was the kind of story they featured above everything else for the past 5 years.

The Guardian has not been a paper of the political left for a very long time. We know the game now. Write a lot of feminist articles but take down even the modest politics of the left. They were advising voting Lib Dem not so long ago. It's a lifestyle and conscience massaging magazine mostly.

 

[sun_tzu]

Also, again indicating the utter inconsistency, 2 frontbenchers resign their roles and it's nowhere to be seen on The Guardian front-page. That was the kind of story they featured above everything else for the past 5 years.

i mean it could also be that over the last 5 years there has not typically been a global pandemic with local and central governments seemingly in disagreement about the exact imposition of restrictions that will impacts 10's of million of people

 

[Jippy]

Also, again indicating the utter inconsistency, 2 frontbenchers resign their roles and it's nowhere to be seen on The Guardian front-page. That was the kind of story they featured above everything else for the past 5 years.

It's unprecedented for a local authority to defy the government like this, particularly during a re-escalating global pandemic, and the new restrictions impact millions of lives. You need to be realistic.

Most people won't even have heard of those frontbenchers who resigned,

 

[Untied]

i mean it could also be that over the last 5 years there has not typically been a global pandemic with local and central governments seemingly in disagreement about the exact imposition of restrictions that will impacts 10's of million of people

Hence the need to feature the Adenugas.

 

[Untied]

It's unprecedented for a local authority to defy the government like this, particularly during a re-escalating global pandemic, and the new restrictions impact millions of lives. You need to be realistic.

Most people won't even have heard of those frontbenchers who resigned,

Like any paper The Guardian has an editorial agenda, and the idea that internal Labour politics was genuinely the most important news issue of the day every time they prominently featured it is for the birds. And when I say frontpage I really meant on the website, where the lack of any feature of the bill is pretty shocking from a supposedly liberal paper:

 

[Fingeredmouse]

It's unprecedented for a local authority to defy the government like this, particularly during a re-escalating global pandemic, and the new restrictions impact millions of lives. You need to be realistic.

Most people won't even have heard of those frontbenchers who resigned,

Come on @Jippy : are you telling me that the frontbenchers resigning under Corbyn were household names?

I'm not suggesting it should be the banner headline given what's going on but they're just not covering this story at all. This is the Guardian, self styled bastion of liberalism and human rights.

 

[Jippy]

Come on @Jippy : are you telling me that the frontbenchers resigning under Corbyn were household names?

I'm not suggesting it should be the banner headline given what's going on but they're just not covering this story at all. This is the Guardian, self styled bastion of liberalism and human rights.

Fair point on the lack of name recognition re Corbyn's frontbenchers quitting, but he was well into double-digits, which was obviously very newsworthy in itself, compared to two yesterday.

But this is yesterday's news -the story broke late afternoon didn't it? That means it will have missed the print run of today's main edition of the newspaper and of course it's going to fall behind corona and Brexit stuff on the website today.
I've no idea how prominently it was covered online yesterday.

 

[711]

Come on @Jippy : are you telling me that the frontbenchers resigning under Corbyn were household names?

I'm not suggesting it should be the banner headline given what's going on but they're just not covering this story at all. This is the Guardian, self styled bastion of liberalism and human rights.

I'm no fan of Corbyn and Momentum (I want a complete split) but I have to say you are right on this one, the coverage has not been equal.

 

[F-Red]

Like any paper The Guardian has an editorial agenda, and the idea that internal Labour politics was genuinely the most important news issue of the day every time they prominently featured it is for the birds. And when I say frontpage I really meant on the website, where the lack of any feature of the bill is pretty shocking from a supposedly liberal paper:

 

[Jippy]

Like any paper The Guardian has an editorial agenda, and the idea that internal Labour politics was genuinely the most important news issue of the day every time they prominently featured it is for the birds. And when I say frontpage I really meant on the website, where the lack of any feature of the bill is pretty shocking from a supposedly liberal paper:

Tbh I was a bit surprised that I had to actively go into the UK politics section to find it, as it wasn't immediately visible on the homepage.

 

[Sweet Square]

Powerful criticism of the government’s performance on COVID-19 and disability employment by Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people was significantly watered down by her own party, Disability News Service (DNS) can reveal.

An email mistakenly sent to DNS yesterday (Wednesday) by a member of Vicky Foxcroft’s staff shows that her original draft comments attacking the government were weakened by someone within the party hierarchy.

The changes made by the party include the removal of a reference to the “vital” role played by trade unions in protecting disabled people from discrimination.

The party also removed any reference to disability discrimination from Foxcroft’s comments.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

Yes and rightly so. Should be far more.

Yep. People can talk about tactics and politicking, but this is an issue where any chance of a Tory rebellion was snuffed out because Labour applied zero pressure.

 

[Dobba]

What a week for truly grown up opposition.

 

[Drifter]

Starmer paying lip service.

 

[Adisa]

Don't think there is anything wrong with having ambition to be leader of your party and the election closed the door on remain, so I don't know what she's on about.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Don't think there is anything wrong with having ambition to be leader of your party and the election closed the door on remain, so I don't know what she's on about.

Lets be honest, no one knows what’s shes on about.

 

[Dobba]

Don't think there is anything wrong with having ambition to be leader of your party and the election closed the door on remain, so I don't know what she's on about.

How are those 10 Pledges looking? He's a duplicitous wanker who only holds a strong opinion on people using the title he accepted and bowed in front of jug ears for.

 

[Untied]

Don't think there is anything wrong with having ambition to be leader of your party and the election closed the door on remain, so I don't know what she's on about.

Unlike the referendum and the 2017 election. What was it, best out of 5?

 

[Dobba]

Unlike the referendum and the 2017 election. What was it, best out of 5?

 

[esmufc07]

It’s almost as if we’d already left the European Union when Starmer became leader.

 

[Dobba]

It’s almost as if we’d already left the European Union when Starmer became leader.

So he should be all about rejoin then.

 

[Pexbo]

So he should be all about rejoin then.

And that might win over the liberal elites but it will further alienate the former red wall.

I’m a remainer but it’s clear as fecking day that Brexit is done and dusted. Campaigning for rejoining before the effects have even been felt is a daft idea. You need to wait until its actually understood what a clusterfeck it is before you can even think about that. The likelihood is that we’re going to have to wait for the boomer generation to die off or at least thin out in both numbers and political capital massively before rejoining becomes part of the agenda. I imagine that when GenX is 70+ and Millennials are 50+ there will be enough nostalgia and enough motivation to rejoin the EU but there is zero chance that will happen in the next 15 years let alone 5.

 

[esmufc07]

So he should be all about rejoin then.

He might be privately, but that’s not what was being discussed.

Abbott’s point about Starmer ‘no longer being remain’ now he is leader is a daft point to make considering we’ve left the institution he wanted to remain in.

 

[711]

Labour National Executive voting emails out. A shedload of reading to come then.

 

[NinjaFletch]

And that might win over the liberal elites but it will further alienate the former red wall.

I’m a remainer but it’s clear as fecking day that Brexit is done and dusted. Campaigning for rejoining before the effects have even been felt is a daft idea. You need to wait until its actually understood what a clusterfeck it is before you can even think about that. The likelihood is that we’re going to have to wait for the boomer generation to die off or at least thin out in both numbers and political capital massively before rejoining becomes part of the agenda. I imagine that when GenX is 70+ and Millennials are 50+ there will be enough nostalgia and enough motivation to rejoin the EU but there is zero chance that will happen in the next 15 years let alone 5.

But, on the other hand, what is it you actually want from Starmer?

I fully understand the arguments that you are making here, I even argued for him taking a step back out of political pragmatism early in his leadership, but at this point what is it all for? He's ceding ground on all issues to placate 'red wall' voters without landing any meaningful blows on the Conservatives and, worse, giving them carte blanche to do whatever they like on a a whole range of areas out of a paralysing fear that actually standing up for Labour values will lose him support.

So what's the end result? Because if the actual values you want in a Labour leader are the anathema to red wall voters you're arguing they are then isn't the end result grimly predictable? Either you're left with a leader who continues to lead according to the confines of what the Daily Mail says is ok, and in doing so cede further ground to the right, or, when Starmer pulls back the mask and reveals himself to actually have had the progressive politics that he was voted in for having, is abandoned in their droves by voters who don't share those politics.

I can't see how you can square the circle.

 

[sun_tzu]

And that might win over the liberal elites but it will further alienate the former red wall.

I’m a remainer but it’s clear as fecking day that Brexit is done and dusted. Campaigning for rejoining before the effects have even been felt is a daft idea. You need to wait until its actually understood what a clusterfeck it is before you can even think about that. The likelihood is that we’re going to have to wait for the boomer generation to die off or at least thin out in both numbers and political capital massively before rejoining becomes part of the agenda. I imagine that when GenX is 70+ and Millennials are 50+ there will be enough nostalgia and enough motivation to rejoin the EU but there is zero chance that will happen in the next 15 years let alone 5.

I'd disagree on that actually
I think with the shift in demographics I think rejoin would have a decent chance now and in a decade (if brexit is anything other than a huge success and my suspicion is that its going to be a clusterfek) it becomes perfectly plausible that by next election and almost certainly the election after that we see a major party (who know if labour will survive in its current format with the level of infigthing and the EHRC and potential financial ruin to come) endorse a position of rejoin in an election and if they win (possiby with SNP support as well depending what happens there) I think one but probablt two election cycles is quite a realistic timeframe for rejoin to be on the cards
What would happen with the £, would the EU want us back in - would an election win be seen as sufficient "will of the people" or would it require another referendum but 15 years could easily be 4 elections now the fixed term parliament act has gone and I could easily see some mix of a Labour + Greens + Libs +SNP winning one of those and making moves towards rejoin

 

[Sweet Square]

Imo the whole point of the Starmer campaign is to get him into number 10 and that's about it(Which was Abbott point in the interview). Any idea of real change went out the window almost of soon as the leadership contest was over.

The most likely way Starmer and his team will try to achieve this is by lowering turnout. There's a ton of old "traditional" white ex Labour voters who care about 3 things - immigration, stopping "socialism" and dog shit outside their front garden. Starmer wants at the very least to not give this voting group a reason to come out on election day and vote against Labour(Which is why we are seeing right wing moves such as attacking BLM, abstaining on liberal civil rights, moves away from socialist politics, etc). As for everybody else the leadership is banking on Labour as the only alternative to the Tories as a way to keep them on side.

It's a gross form of politics and something the party has tired before with "Red Ed" but well it's what the membership wants.

 

[Jippy]

But, on the other hand, what is it you actually want from Starmer?

I fully understand the arguments that you are making here, I even argued for him taking a step back out of political pragmatism early in his leadership, but at this point what is it all for? He's ceding ground on all issues to placate 'red wall' voters without landing any meaningful blows on the Conservatives and, worse, giving them carte blanche to do whatever they like on a a whole range of areas out of a paralysing fear that actually standing up for Labour values will lose him support.

So what's the end result? Because if the actual values you want in a Labour leader are the anathema to red wall voters you're arguing they are then isn't the end result grimly predictable? Either you're left with a leader who continues to lead according to the confines of what the Daily Mail says is ok, and in doing so cede further ground to the right, or, when Starmer pulls back the mask and reveals himself to actually have had the progressive politics that he was voted in for having, is abandoned in their droves by voters who don't share those politics.

I can't see how you can square the circle.

It's a bit of a tangent to your wider point, but what are the expectations of the 'red wall' voters' future voting patterns. Fine Brexit was the big factor and clearly Corby scared some off, but has their been any modelling or surveys of how many are expected to stick with the Tories in the next election? Or is it just way too early?

 

[TheGame]

"I blame his mother for calling him Keir" oh shut the hell up Abbot. And as for McCluskey, sooner Labour distance themselves from him the better.

 

[Drifter]

Len McCluskey accused of antisemitism after ‘count your gold’ jibe to Peter Mandelson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ism-peter-mandelson-gold-labour-b1176745.html

Guess you can be Anti-Semitic to non Jews now.

 

[Eugenius]

Len McCluskey accused of antisemitism after ‘count your gold’ jibe to Peter Mandelson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ism-peter-mandelson-gold-labour-b1176745.html

Guess you can be Anti-Semitic to non Jews now.

He’s half Jewish

 

[Smores]

It's a bit of a tangent to your wider point, but what are the expectations of the 'red wall' voters' future voting patterns. Fine Brexit was the big factor and clearly Corby scared some off, but has their been any modelling or surveys of how many are expected to stick with the Tories in the next election? Or is it just way too early?

There was an article not so long back in the NS that showed support there was holding up and the Brexit divide remains.

Labours gains right now are mainly Lib Dem votes, some further support in the South and that the Tories have more former voters undecided.

Given the shit storm we're walking into it's far too soon to say. If Brexit isn't a disaster then there shouldn't be any expectation of gaining those votes. I've not seen much on Tory remainers but i can't see them jumping in the required numbers or in the areas needed. Those gained Southern votes for instance are largely pointless given majorities.

Labour will need to come up with something appealing because i severely doubt a 'not the other guy" strategy will work.

 

[Untied]

It’s almost as if we’d already left the European Union when Starmer became leader.

You've made this point before as if it's some kind of gotcha, when the point Abbott and others are making is that there has been a duplicity in pushing Labour under Corbyn to become more pro-EU, more remain, and that has completely gone out of the window once he took up the leadership. Obviously coronavirus is dominating the news, but it's quite likely we are heading towards no deal Brexit with barely a peep from the opposition, or all of the pro-EU organisations.

You must admit it is weird how the People's Vote campaign, or Better Together, Our Future Our Choice, etc have all just downed tools and their funding has disappeared, after the 2019 result – an election where more people voted for parties that supported a referendum or even revoking the result than the those promising to implement it – compared to 2017 when 82% of the electorate voted for parties that were promising to complete Brexit.

 

[Sweet Square]

He’s half Jewish

Mandelson doesn't view himself as Jewish and wasn't raised Jewish(And his dad wasn't really Jewish according to Mandelson).

 

[sullydnl]

You've made this point before as if it's some kind of gotcha, when the point Abbott and others are making is that there has been a duplicity in pushing Labour under Corbyn to become more pro-EU, more remain, and that has completely gone out of the window once he took up the leadership. Obviously coronavirus is dominating the news, but it's quite likely we are heading towards no deal Brexit with barely a peep from the opposition, or all of the pro-EU organisations.

You must admit it is weird how the People's Vote campaign, or Better Together, Our Future Our Choice, etc have all just downed tools and their funding has disappeared, after the 2019 result – an election where more people voted for parties that supported a referendum or even revoking the result than the those promising to implement it – compared to 2017 when 82% of the electorate voted for parties that were promising to complete Brexit.

Something rather crucial happened between those two points: a Tory party led by arch-Brexiteers landslided an election to a historic degree and then Brexit actually happened. "Remain" is now politically as dead as dead can be, which wasn't the case immediately after the referendum. It's hardly duplicity to recognise to change positions when circumstances have clearly shifted.

Also, one of the main criticisms I saw of Starmer as a potential Labour leader was that he was too associated with the "remain" position to appeal to the voters Labour needed to win back. At which point you wonder what exactly he's supposed to do now that he is leader? If he keeps pushing remain/rejoin when it's politically dead then he's criticised for alienating voters, if he moves on from the remain/rejoin position he's instead criticised for being duplicitous.

 

[Jippy]

There was an article not so long back in the NS that showed support there was holding up and the Brexit divide remains.

Labours gains right now are mainly Lib Dem votes, some further support in the South and that the Tories have more former voters undecided.

Given the shit storm we're walking into it's far too soon to say. If Brexit isn't a disaster then there shouldn't be any expectation of gaining those votes. I've not seen much on Tory remainers but i can't see them jumping in the required numbers or in the areas needed. Those gained Southern votes for instance are largely pointless given majorities.

Labour will need to come up with something appealing because i severely doubt a 'not the other guy" strategy will work.

Is hard not to feel that even if Brexit isn't economically disastrous somehow -and maybe the real pain will take time to come through- surely these historic Labour voters can be won back when the Tories inevitably start cutting benefits and services. Or at least some of them.
It's depressing if we openly slide into a kleptocracy cos no-one can be arsed to give a shit.

 

[Untied]

Something rather crucial happened between those two points: a Tory party led by arch-Brexiteers landslided an election to a historic degree and then Brexit actually happened. "Remain" is now politically as dead as dead can be, which wasn't the case immediately after the referendum. It's hardly duplicity to recognise to change positions when circumstances have clearly shifted.

Also, one of the main criticisms I saw of Starmer as a potential Labour leader was that he was too associated with the "remain" position to appeal to the voters Labour needed to win back. At which point you wonder what exactly he's supposed to do now that he is leader? If he keeps pushing remain/rejoin when it's politically dead then he's criticised for alienating voters, if he moves on from the remain/rejoin position he's instead criticised for being duplicitous.

There's this desire to just rewrite history so the two democratic results preceding 2019 don't really count, and therefore pretend that 'this was the one that done it'. Politically it should have been dead after 2016 – the FPTP majority for Brexit was/is huge. My main evidence of Starmer being duplicitous isn't changing tack on remain though, rather the pledges he made during the leadership election which he seems to actively enjoy reneging on.

Plus, if you read the second half of my post, I pointed out more people voted for explicitly anti-Brexit or pro-referendum positions in 2019 than in 2017. Obviously FPTP kills it, but electorally pro-EU manifestos did far better in 2019 than in 2017. I just feel sorry for the people (and Labour members) for whom staying the EU genuinely is something they feel passionate about, because they've been taken for an utter ride by people and organisations that have abandoned that cause as soon as it wasn't in their self-interest to pursue it. Would Farage have stopped campaigning against the EU if he'd lost the referendum?

 

[Eugenius]

Mandelson doesn't view himself as Jewish and wasn't raised Jewish(And his dad wasn't really Jewish according to Mandelson).

The issue is in the intent of the comment, regardless of whether Mandelson considers himself Jewish or not. If the comment was said either a) with the context/knowledge of Mandelson's heritage or b) used in the knowledge it was a negative Jewish trope then it's antisemitism.

I honestly don't know, but it's a very odd expression he's used.