Westminster Politics

ThehatchetMan said:
The thing is alot of your argument is based on again reasons to not vote tory rather than reasons to vote Starmer. For example:

- Paragraph 2 applicable to any potential labour leader and most opposition party leader.

- Paragraph 3 same as above.

- Paragraph 4 based on a belief. Surely you believe corbyn would have done that too? Or Lib Dems? Or Greens? Again most partys and party leaders.

Anyway without sounding like a broken record. It is all very much just beliefs on what we think. And that's exactly where we all are. Playing this guessing game of thinking rather than knowing.

A good leader in my opinion should first and foremost be able to articulate a clear plan and message to his target audience. We still have no idea where Starmer stands. He's like a sea-saw.

A year ago he's quoted speaking to a Lgbt charity about how he's supporting trans rights and stuff. A year later he's contradicting himself.

A year ago he's quoted saying he's supportive of cannabis reforms. The next year he's saying the smell of cannabis is destroying lives and that his focus is on anti social behaviour suddenly. A real non problem in the Current state of affairs.

Even the Gary Linekar stuff they were very hush hush and on the fence. Even the female mp on Question Time that week was criticising the language he used too. And tbh she didn't speak very well at all, she wasn't very sharp. But anyway it was only after the public backlash to Linekar being suspended that Starmer finally took a public stance.

I know someone quoted me earlier laughing at me talking about the election after next. But unfortunately if you actually want to be able to implement radical reforms then there's only so much which can be achieved in 5 years. And it's going to take alot longer than 5 years to fix this current sorry state of affairs.

Given the current economic climate, unless things radically change by 2025, whoever takes over is going to be taking over a shit show. Once cornavirus and brexit happened I actually thought labour losing in 2019 may have been a blessing in disguise. Because things were evidently going to get worse and no matter how well Labour could have managed it, people would still point back to "but it was better in 2018" or "everything went to shit when labour took over" and they'd likely get kicked out next election.

If you think back to 2010, the main driver for labour losing the election was the global recession. However the UK tabloids towed the "labour can't be trusted with the economy" line and thus labour lost the election. Had the recession never happened then things may have been very different.

So considering the current economic climate we're in and that things may very well need to get worse before they get better. I think for me that we need a leader that is willing to try and make those radical changes. Not one who is focused on graffiti and refusing to support the "militant unions".

With all the above said, I'd still rather explore Starmers labour over another tory flavour. But it would be very much so to keep torys out rather than buying into Starmers vision. Have to say though I do like a bit of Raynor and her potty mouth. The more I think about it she's kind of one of those under rated sexy not sexy kind of people. I would.
Click to expand...

Our country is broken. It took the Tories 13 years to get to ‘Refugees in Prison barges’ and for large swathes of the electorate to be cool with it.

Labour will need at least the same amount of time to make things better. They need your vote.

But sure. Clutch your pearls, stay home, don’t vote and hope for the best.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
When others are happy to have starmer simply because he isn't a tory then this also needs to be highlighted.

Without the promise of the dramatic reforms we need, a Labour government headed up by Starmer could very easily lose the election after next. And the classic lines "they're all as bad as each other" will never be truer.

What is it about Starmers vision that has you in such strong support?
Click to expand...
Starmer can always be replaced by his party. There’s been 13 years and multiple Tory pms of which the next always seems worse than the previous one. They’ve been lying and stealing from the public purse. I don’t get why peoples first priority is not to get them out. If this thread is anyway an indication of Joe Public then you’re stuck with the Tories for another 4 years. It will really be a case at that point if you voted for it and the more the country goes further and further into the shit, just remember who enabled this bunch
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Our country is broken. It took the Tories 13 years to get to ‘Refugees in Prison barges’ and for large swathes of the electorate to be cool with it.

Labour will need at least the same amount of time to make things better. They need your vote.

But sure. Clutch your pearls, stay home, don’t vote and hope for the best.
Click to expand...
Agree with the second paragraph.

Not sure what the third is about.

Some people get really upset over any criticism of starmer. You can be critical of both the governing party as well as the opposition.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
I don't think that's the case. If all Starmer is offering is a slightly different version of what's happening under the Tories, you could imagine the people he's trying to suck up will say, we may as well have the real thing.

If the country aren't sick of what has been happening with the Tories and Starmer only wants to please the xenophobes and Brexiters and hopes he can win their votes, the country's a lost cause anyway.

Why not be radical and do things that are good for the country and if the leader had any gumption or character, he could try and convince them. Still 18 months to go, wasted 3 years so far. Starmer is probably the most hopeless leader Labour have had since the war. And that's saying something.
Click to expand...

Most of the policies will come out before the election. We haven’t seen any of them this early as the Tories just nick them anyway. The problem with this country it just seems to pander to the same feckers who voted for Brexit.
 
golden_blunder said:
Starmer can always be replaced by his party. There’s been 13 years and multiple Tory pms of which the next always seems worse than the previous one. They’ve been lying and stealing from the public purse. I don’t get why peoples first priority is not to get them out. If this thread is anyway an indication of Joe Public then you’re stuck with the Tories for another 4 years. It will really be a case at that point if you voted for it and the more the country goes further and further into the shit, just remember who enabled this bunch
Click to expand...
He can indeed be replaced but that requires a vote of no confidence and he's doing his best to banish the party of more left leaning members. You won't read it on mainstream media but I suggest reading into the purge of more left leaning candidates as well as those with trade union connections by the NEC in the election pre selection process. Corbyn is of course one of the most highly documented cases but he is just one of many. Starmer is purging the party of the most left leaning members while replacing them with centrists. If you've got left wing political views then this isn't good.

Second paragraph is usual shite which others post here where if you criticise starmer apparently you're suddenly a tory supporter or someone who enables them.

Sometimes I think I prefix my post with "I WILL VOTE TACTICALLY TO GET TORIES IN" considering the replies from some.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Some people get really upset over any criticism of starmer. You can be critical of both the governing party as well as the opposition.
Click to expand...

ThehatchetMan said:
Sometimes I think I prefix my post with "I WILL VOTE TACTICALLY TO GET TORIES IN" considering the replies from some.
Click to expand...


There's 2 types of tory voters:

  • One is the proud and stupid, full on brexit, obnoxious type of tory voter, that will argue endlessly on a debate that you cannot win, because you can beat a pidgeon in chess.
  • The other is the "secret tory", who doesn't have the confidence to admit they're tories because they know people will rightly dislike them for it and when it comes to arguments they engage in 2 ways - anti-Labour rhetoric, and sealioning.

You come across like the second. Maybe you're not one of them, but you need to know, that's what you sound like.
 


A perfectly normal government in perfectly normal times!

It’s amazing how quick we’ve gone from ‘the MET needs to root out its institutional racism, misogyny & homophobia’ to ‘it’s not the police’s responsibility to tackle racism’!
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Nobody is saying it isn't OK. I probably dislike the Conservative party more than most members on here. I will however hold labour to the same standards and will be just as critical of them as and where I see fit. Criticising Starmer shouldn't be seen as supporting Torys.
Click to expand...
I have no problem criticising Starmer, if it is for the right reasons. Lack of vision, a certain woodenness, maybe over caution - all seem to be valid. Criticising him for recognising Corbynism was electoral cancer, and making Labour electable again, is the wrong reason.
 
Did Starmer make Labour electable, or did the unprecedented collapse of the Conservatives make the Conservatives unelectable? In any case, the election hasn't happened yet, we have no idea how electable Labour will actually turn out to be.
 
nimic said:
Did Starmer make Labour electable, or did the unprecedented collapse of the Conservatives make the Conservatives unelectable? In any case, the election hasn't happened yet, we have no idea how electable Labour will actually turn out to be.
Click to expand...
Well, true we don't yet know. But we can extrapolate.

I will observe what does seem to be a pattern with the Left, where Labour never gets credit for being electable, it's always a consequence of the Tories losing. ie Blair didn't win, it was the Tories unelectabilty/John Smith really etc. You see it in reverse with Corbyn, who was apparently electable (even though he wasn't) but it was various dark forces who prevented him winning.

No, I don't buy it. Starmer has positioned Labour as a credible alternative government and he should get credit for that.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
Well, true we don't yet know. But we can extrapolate.

I will observe that does seem to be a pattern with the Left where Labour never gets credit for being electable, it's always a consequence of the Tories losing. ie Blair didn't win, it was the Tories unelectabilty/John Smith really etc. You see it in reverse with Corbyn, who was apparently electable (even though he wasn't) but it was various dark forces who prevented him winning.

No, I don't buy it. Starmer has positioned Labour as a credible alternative government and he should get credit for that.
Click to expand...

Blair won a landslide off the back of his proposed policies (and Tory fatigue but still would have won regardless). Starmer has offered nothing at all.

What will this credible alternative government do differently? Let alone better!
 
Eplel said:
There's 2 types of tory voters:

  • One is the proud and stupid, full on brexit, obnoxious type of tory voter, that will argue endlessly on a debate that you cannot win, because you can beat a pidgeon in chess.
  • The other is the "secret tory", who doesn't have the confidence to admit they're tories because they know people will rightly dislike them for it and when it comes to arguments they engage in 2 ways - anti-Labour rhetoric, and sealioning.

You come across like the second. Maybe you're not one of them, but you need to know, that's what you sound like.
Click to expand...

The secret tory voter is probably more of the kind that supports right wing leaders in the Labour Party. As they get the same policies whether they vote Labour or tory.

I think if you ask most people who consider themselves supporters of momentum or the Labour socialist campaign group; the vast majority aren't starmer fans.

Starmers flavour of Labour is "Labour first" which is known as traditionally being a group with views to the right of traditional labour.

So if you want to compare anyone to a secret tory it's probably those endorsing Starmer. They probably put a cheeky vote for Boris at the last election due to corbyn being an "IRA sympathiser" or whatever other media bs they lapped up.
 
nickm said:
I have no problem criticising Starmer, if it is for the right reasons. Lack of vision, a certain woodenness, maybe over caution - all seem to be valid. Criticising him for recognising Corbynism was electoral cancer, and making Labour electable again, is the wrong reason.
Click to expand...
Corbyns 2017 election was the biggest gains labour have ever made in a GE, not quite electoral cancer. I think if you want to talk about electoral cancer your probably best talking about Ed Milliband, whose flavour is very similar to Starmers.

Corbyn had supporters who bought into his vision and people who wanted to vote for him for that vision. This thread is evident that nobody has reasons to vote Starmer. Everyone's reasons are based on believing he will do stuff he hasn't said he will do or to keep the torys out. There's a stark contrast.

Lord Buckethead could be leader of Labour and have the same lead in the polls. Because that lead in the polls is simply based on the tories self destructing rather than Starmers revolution or vision.

I have to say I'm quite surprised to find so many people that are right of centre on this forum as I was always under the impression most consider themselves left wing here. But I guess I must be one of the few true left wingers on here.
 
nimic said:
Did Starmer make Labour electable, or did the unprecedented collapse of the Conservatives make the Conservatives unelectable? In any case, the election hasn't happened yet, we have no idea how electable Labour will actually turn out to be.
Click to expand...
The latter. Doesn't even need to be a question.
 
Bert_ said:
Blair won a landslide off the back of his proposed policies (and Tory fatigue but still would have won regardless). Starmer has offered nothing at all.

What will this credible alternative government do differently? Let alone better!
Click to expand...
I bet you must be a secret tory voter too .

Anyone who doesn't endorse right wing labour leaders who purge the left wing candidates via the NEC is apparently one mate.

Starmer could have braverman, Patel, gullis, Boris and Fabricant in his labour shadow cabinet and some will be telling us how great and electable he and his cabinet are.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
I bet you must be a secret tory voter too .

Anyone who doesn't endorse right wing labour leaders who purge the left wing candidates via the NEC is apparently one mate.

Starmer could have braverman, Patel, gullis, Boris and Fabricant in his labour shadow cabinet and some will be telling us how great and electable he and his cabinet are.
Click to expand...

Apart from their rhetoric, I'm not sure if there is any difference between those mentioned and Starmer's shadow cabinet.
 
Frosty said:
That cannot relate to seats gained, but the popular vote?
Click to expand...
Yep 9.6 percent vote share increased from Millibands government. The most by any labour leader since pre war times.

Yet corbyns the electoral cancer.. The 2019 election was won on brexit not manifestos. Corbyns lead would just be as big if not bigger now. Fortunately for starmer the right wing media seem to quite like him so at least he probably won't have the same media manipulation to go up against. That in itself is worrying.
 
Bert_ said:
Apart from their rhetoric, I'm not sure if there is any difference between those mentioned and Starmer's shadow cabinet.
Click to expand...
Yvette Cooper certainly has alot of blood on her hands with welfare changes she made. And she's not disfamiliar with taking advantage of expenses for financial gain either.

In her defence though she does speak bloody well in Westminster and actually has a brain. Not a fan of her history but she's 100x the person braverman is.

The point is though she shouldn't be immune from criticism. Better than a tory she is though.
 
Labour just seems like a Tory Lite to me right now. A better prospect than the Tories no doubt, but not a party that will ultimately do much good either.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Yvette Cooper certainly has alot of blood on her hands with welfare changes she made. And she's not disfamiliar with taking advantage of expenses for financial gain either.

In her defence though she does speak bloody well in Westminster and actually has a brain. Not a fan of her history but she's 100x the person braverman is.

The point is though she shouldn't be immune from criticism. Better than a tory she is though.
Click to expand...

Yvette Cooper is one of the most competent politians in Westminster. And you're right, she'd be many levels above Braverman, or any Tory cabinet minster, including PMs in terms of ability. Not a particular high bar at the minute.

There is far more to politics than just being good at it though. The acid test is what would she do different to Braverman? Given her track record, probably not a lot.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Corbyns 2017 election was the biggest gains labour have ever made in a GE, not quite electoral cancer. I think if you want to talk about electoral cancer your probably best talking about Ed Milliband, whose flavour is very similar to Starmers.
Click to expand...

Yes, but he LOST - against the worst Tory campaign in living memory. And typically Labour drew the wrong conclusions, ignored the massive, MASSIVE problem of their leadership, doubled down and almost took the party out as an electoral force. You'd think a little bit of humility would be nice from that side? It's not Starmer who led the party to being almost extinguished is it? So maybe some credibility is due for the turnaround?

ThehatchetMan said:
Corbyn had supporters who bought into his vision and people who wanted to vote for him for that vision. This thread is evident that nobody has reasons to vote Starmer. Everyone's reasons are based on believing he will do stuff he hasn't said he will do or to keep the torys out. There's a stark contrast.
Click to expand...

Corbyn had fans who didn't want to look facts in the eye. And still don't.

ThehatchetMan said:
Lord Buckethead could be leader of Labour and have the same lead in the polls. Because that lead in the polls is simply based on the tories self destructing rather than Starmers revolution or vision.
Click to expand...

That lead is party because Starmer has kicked out the people who were electoral poison. The evidence of just how repellent Corbyn was to potential voters in the last election is clear.

ThehatchetMan said:
I have to say I'm quite surprised to find so many people that are right of centre on this forum as I was always under the impression most consider themselves left wing here. But I guess I must be one of the few true left wingers on here.
Click to expand...

How marvellous.
 
nickm said:
Yes, but he LOST - against the worst Tory campaign in living memory. And typically Labour drew the wrong conclusions, ignored the massive, MASSIVE problem of their leadership, doubled down and almost took the party out as an electoral force. You'd think a little bit of humility would be nice from that side? It's not Starmer who led the party to being almost extinguished is it? So maybe some credibility is due for the turnaround?
Click to expand...

Ha! My sides are splitting.
 
Eplel said:
There's 2 types of tory voters:

  • One is the proud and stupid, full on brexit, obnoxious type of tory voter, that will argue endlessly on a debate that you cannot win, because you can beat a pidgeon in chess.
  • The other is the "secret tory", who doesn't have the confidence to admit they're tories because they know people will rightly dislike them for it and when it comes to arguments they engage in 2 ways - anti-Labour rhetoric, and sealioning.

You come across like the second. Maybe you're not one of them, but you need to know, that's what you sound like.
Click to expand...
This some serious projection tbf
 
Eplel said:
There's 2 types of tory voters:

  • One is the proud and stupid, full on brexit, obnoxious type of tory voter, that will argue endlessly on a debate that you cannot win, because you can beat a pidgeon in chess.
  • The other is the "secret tory", who doesn't have the confidence to admit they're tories because they know people will rightly dislike them for it and when it comes to arguments they engage in 2 ways - anti-Labour rhetoric, and sealioning.

You come across like the second. Maybe you're not one of them, but you need to know, that's what you sound like.
Click to expand...
There are those that vote Tory because they feel it’s in their best interest.
 
nickm said:
Yes, but he LOST - against the worst Tory campaign in living memory. And typically Labour drew the wrong conclusions, ignored the massive, MASSIVE problem of their leadership, doubled down and almost took the party out as an electoral force. You'd think a little bit of humility would be nice from that side? It's not Starmer who led the party to being almost extinguished is it? So maybe some credibility is due for the turnaround?
Click to expand...

He lost because people didn't trust or like him. And it was really hard to model that personal dislike and distrust in advance.

Starmer is far too far right for my liking, and almost as authoritarian as corbyn/the tories, but he's at least an improvement and electable.

Bert_ said:
Yvette Cooper is one of the most competent politians in Westminster. And you're right, she'd be many levels above Braverman, or any Tory cabinet minster, including PMs in terms of ability. Not a particular high bar at the minute.

There is far more to politics than just being good at it though. The acid test is what would she do different to Braverman? Given her track record, probably not a lot.
Click to expand...

I quite like her, but she's certainly no Margaret Beckett. She tends to go with her party flow.
 
From the outside looking in if corbyn is unelectable after Boris Johnson and Lizz Truss then you need to change how your elections work. I think its made up bolox but if i was to take it seriously then your electoral system is totally fecking broken
 
caid said:
From the outside looking in if corbyn is unelectable after Boris Johnson and Lizz Truss then you need to change how your elections work. I think its made up bolox but if i was to take it seriously then your electoral system is totally fecking broken
Click to expand...

I mean, it is broken. We use first past the post, meaning a government can win a majority and do whatever they want for 5 years (thanks to no codified constitution) with around 12-13m votes, out of a population of 67m or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.