Sir! Keir! Starmer!

Let me ask you a question; do you really believe all that? Like genuinely?

Yes I write what I believe in. Don't you believe in what you write?

Yes I write what I believe in

So next question; what are your prime sources of information?

He could draft in Angela Rayner to do his job after he’s resigned.

I believe her personal life might be a bit messy at the moment so not the best time to step up.

As for the finances I really doubt they are that bad, as you say probably a part of the smokescreen to clear house in head office, arguably badly needed, but not the distraction you need

Why not attempt to actually answer a question put to you? Or can’t you?

I'm sure you are expert at defending your use of Language and would run rings round someone you yourself call delusional. You clearly have had a lot of practice defending you turns of phrase and no doubt are convinced that you are absolutely justified in using the words you do.

I still think they are tropes, used in the context of tropes, and are language that should be confined to the history books.

When floundering, change the subject. Right. Ok.

I was returning the thread back to the original topic, sorry to burst your ego bubble but it's more interesting than your increasingly hysterical defence of your language. You can start a new thread with that topic if you want.

I still think they are tropes, used in the context of tropes

So; explain why then. If you truly believe what you are insinuating, then you should be able to explain why.

If you've made a mistake, then it would be far more honourable to just admit it, apologise and move on.

sorry to burst your ego bubble

You can't even admit you've made a mistake, that you've ****ed up, that you're wrong and have no argument, and you're talking about ego? Lol!

The entire claim appears to be based on one comment made by David Evans which is that the reserves only exist for one month’s wages.

Yeah agreed, "reserves" is the key word here. I don't think he's talking about current acct balance, assets, donations, etc etc he's talking about a very specific bank acct. It might be that court fines or settlements are drawn from the reserve acct, but I'd imagine they have a plan for increasing the amount, even if it is a reduction in day to day spending.

Electoral Commission summary of Labour Party accts Oct 2020

Obviously it's 8-9 months out of date but there's £25.6M in the reserve acct...

I would have thought that one thing we could agree on by now is that Labour is not going to gain support simply by waiting for government cock-ups…

Unequivocally.

But the point is Starmer isn't doing anything. So the only current minuscule of hope is something drastic happens to the Cons.

Starmer had his chance. You could argue that the pandemic prevented him from going on the attack and making the most of being the new leader in the six months of his leadership... but it's hard to argue either that he'll get a second chance, or that he looks to have the skills to make the most of one. So we're back to a new Labour leader taking on the Conservatives at the next election. Which is where most of us were already this time last year. So we're back to... who, when and how...

He can’t prevent that but he can do a much better job of dealing with it – via his media presence (interviews, tv appearances) and leadership within the party.

So what should he have done?
You do realise outside of fantasy land the media get to choose who they interview and how and for example might deliberately edit a interview to make someone look bad?
A perfect example of the fantasy about good media is Cameron. He was put forward as an all conquering media expert with his PR background (itself a tad of a lie since having mummy get you a job as a PR flack isnt exactly much of a PR role) compared to Milliband but as soon as he actually went against the press he suddenly fell to bits.
As for leadership inside the party. What do you suggest? He was dealing with a bunch of ideological lunatics whose only interest was purging the left. These arent people open to rational argument so the only real option would have been to boot them out.

But the point is Starmer isn’t doing anything. So the only current minuscule of hope is something drastic happens to the Cons.

I am assuming that the latest poll which has reduced the Tory to just 4% is more about the Tories doing badly than Labour doing well.

Of course once any bad headlines disappear then double poll leads are likely and it merely represents a unimportant blip.

If you want win people over and motivate them to walk down to their polling stations on election day you really need to give them something to believe in.

Arguing that the Tories are shit and so are we but they are more shit than us is a poor strategy.

So back on topic, who can Starmer draft in to lift his profile and to start to make in roads on the PM who yesterday sounded like a babbling schoolboy who hadn’t done his homework at PMQs?

He can't. Starmer's the issue.

As for media training - it only goes so far. When your core beliefs are not distinct enough away from the Tories you are stuck in a debate that is all about competence, and that frankly is a waste of time for shifting voting patterns. We have seen that time and time again this year.

Does anyone remember or care about wallpapergate?

you really need to give them something to believe in.

The problem for any leader of Labour is of course that to win any election now, you need not only Conservative voters to vote for you, but SNP voters as well. Persuading those two disparate groups to vote the same way will be a challenge.

I agree with @big_n_daft's summary; competent enough to do the job, not competent enough to get there.

That was pretty much my summary in 2019 !

We'll never know if the first statement is true, he will never be PM. He doesn't have what it takes to get there, that was obvious from the start.

You could argue that the pandemic prevented him from going on the attack and making the most of being the new leader in the six months of his leadership

Or you could argue that he used the cover of the pandemic to instigate a factional war against the membership in an effort to regain rightwing central control of the party. It's easy to look inwards when you're prevented from talking to the public. Not that he would have done that in any case, pandemic or not.

competent enough to do the job

Any evidence of that? He couldn't even execute a minor reshuffle without being forced to promote the one person he wanted to sack!

When your core beliefs are not distinct enough away from the Tories

But Starmer's are when he wants them to be.

My pledges to you :

Keir Starmer

^ he's on record saying that he's abandoned those pledges.

he’s abandoned those pledges.

Yes that's very obvious! Even without him admitting guilt. And he abandoned them with astonishing speed.

The point is he is perfectly capable of offering an alternative to the Tories if he feels it is necessary. His core beliefs are adapted to suit the situation.

"These are my principles, if you don't like them I have others"

G. Marx

But Starmer’s are when he wants them to be.

That's why I never believed it from the start.

The point being core beliefs are what drives you strongly to do something progressive. He doesn't really have them.

I think they though it would be easy to win over the floaters. The Ian Dunts of the world have this belief too.

The middle ground is a rudderless place to exist in politics.

So we’re back to a new Labour leader taking on the Conservatives at the next election. Which is where most of us were already this time last year. So we’re back to… who, when and how…

Jeremy Corbyn couldn't do any worse. A monkey with a twitter account couldn't do any worse, come to think of it. Even Ed Milliband couldn't do any worse! 😀

Good to see all the former Armresters on here seeing sense at last. Some of us saw that pretty much as soon as Starmer was elected leader, some, even sooner. But it's good that finally people have realise just how utterly ****ing useless Starmer is.

As for the next leader; the only way to actually challenge the tories, is with some actual policies that people can get behind. Such as protecting the NHS, protecting and improving workers rights, pay and conditions, improving representation for minorities, increasing public spending on vital services, making education accessible for all, re-nationalising essential services and industries, etc. Basically, just going back to 2009 would be a good start. But anyone daring to suggest such (as Corbyn did...) would probably now be labelled an evil commie or something, by the mainstream right wing media. anyone who wants to genuinely take Labour forward into being a viable political force, has to have the balls to push for such policies. Corbyn had those balls; Starmer has none. Now, more than ever, is the time for the membership to unite and force the neo-liberals out. There really is no other way. Otherwise it's tory rule forever.

That’s why I never believed it from the start.

Which suggests that the real problem exists with the party membership.

Starmer won the leadership election with 56% of the vote. For that to happen required a significant amount of the 62% who had previously voted for Corbyn to vote for him.

Why would anyone who had backed Corbyn want to back Starmer? Starmer went out of his way to undermine Corbyn (their choice) with coordinating front bench resignations designed to inflict the maximum amount of damage on Corbyn. And all carefully choreographed to provide maximum media coverage.

Both the right and the left within the Labour Party accepts that Labour's Brexit stance in 2019 (compared to its 2017 stance) was hugely damaging electorally to the party.

Why on earth choose as leader the one person above all others (Labour's shadow Brexit minister) most responsible for pursuing that policy?

Labour's poor leadership choices is a reflection of the serious issues it has concerning its membership, and how disconnected it has become from the wider population.

That is true of both the left and the right of the party.

Changing leaders solves and changes nothing.

Labour’s poor leadership choices is a reflection of the serious issues it has concerning its membership

Fairly sure that this conflict in the membership is present in every party though, Just as Labour is made up of everything from hard-left socialists, through Scandinavian style social democrats to left of centre liberals, the Tories have an equally diverse membership of Die-hard Thatcherites to market-town Middle Englanders, Landed gentry to UKIP anti Europeans, to full on free-market libertarians. In think given the political landscape as it stands, the Tories' membership find they have more to agree with each other than to disagree about. Having lost the last 4 elections, Labour are the opposite.

At my most pessimistic I think Labour are on a long downwards spiral to disintegration, I don't think winning an election would do anything to stop the in-fighting and in fact could easily make it worse, at my most optimistic, I think all it would take is someone to rally around, and Labour could be a unstoppable force for change.

Why would anyone who had backed Corbyn want to back Starmer?

I think a lot of people were prepared to swallow a few principles to achieve a practical result, and were somewhat reassured by Starmer's promises. I was on the fence so made him my second preference, but I never imagined that he would be quite so spectacularly useless as he has proven to be.

Why would anyone who had backed Corbyn want to back Starmer?

I backed Corbyn, until it became obvious that he wasn't a good enough leader and couldn't prevent the infighting, I voted Starmer as I thought he was bland enough to not be offensive to either side of the party and he promised to keep the policies. Same as Ransos, I never thought he'd be quite this invisible

Changing leaders solves and changes nothing.

Well, changing leaders has made Labour even more 'unelectable', so that at least has changed. But Labour needs a root and branch reform, and a clearing out of all the neoliberals, Blairites and right-wingers, if it's ever going to offer and actual viable alternative for society.

From the very first page of this thread:

I’m just hoping the rumours are true (IIRC it was in the Guardian) that the first thing Kier Starmer is going to do is have a night of the long knives to clear out every last one of the utterly useless Corbynites, both on the front bench and behind the scenes, and actually appoint some people who are capable of finding their own arses using both hands.

I’m also hoping that involves firing Richard Burgon into the sun.

There needs to be a Kinnock/Militant style purge to even think dragging the labour party back from its Corbynite political irrelevence, where its presently languishing in its own delusional ‘we won the argument’ bullshit

How's that worked out? Have the Armresters 'won the argument' this time? Labour are even more irrelevant now. As they were under Kinnock. You'd think that trying exactly the same thing that didn't work before, would be a stupid thing to do, no? Apparently Sir Keith isn't bothered about historical facts. Shame, because he might have just avoided utter humiliation and failure.

actually appoint some people who are capable of finding their own arses using both hands

So far, Armrest has managed to lose many, many thousands of members, many millions of pounds of party funds, the support of donors, unions and voters, and so far shows no sign of knowing where his own arse is. Which would be handy, because he could then perhaps try to avoid the door hitting it on his way out. Dear oh dear.

Hey All,

Just a comment and my last. Whilst the vote is split we will keep getting a Conservative government. They aren't the majority, that's for sure but they have gamed the system to ensure that votes are split between Greens, Labour and Liberals, then in Wales and Scotland you obviously have the other parties of Plaid Cymru and SNP. So the issue is first past the post and us squabbling who to vote for, whilst forgetting that we need to get rid of the Tory's regardless...

JeZ

Tories have an equally diverse membership...

I am not saying that Labour's problem are due to a diversity of membership, I am in fact saying the complete opposite. Sorry I should have made that clearer.

The demographics of both the left and the right of the party is pretty much identical these days. Someone on the right of the party is more than likely to have the same background as someone on the left.

Dennis Skinner would stand zero chance of being selected to stand as a candidate in today's Labour Party, it just wouldn't happen. A qualified barrister would stand a far better chance.

The problem with Labour isn't its diversity but its lack of diversity. In fact the Tories probably offer more opportunities for people of different backgrounds to progress through the party than Labour does.

I never thought he’d be quite this invisible

Given he spent almost all of his leadership campaign cosying up to the left to convince them to vote for him on a platform of unity, I never thought he'd turn on them almost instantly and spend the next 18 months putting more effort into fighting his own party rather than the tories. 18 months and not a single identifiable policy or statement of what he would do in government. And we wonder why no one wants to vote for him?

If only those he is fighting with also put more effort into fighting the Tories than the Labour party leader. This pendulum of factions of the party battling for relevance against each other is utterly tiresome to outside observers (ie most voters). Those groups listed as likely to be proscribed in the party soon are just as much part of the problem as Starmer. And run by people outside the party wanting to damage it.

And run by people outside the party wanting to damage it.

Labour is already run by people outside the party wanting to damage it. They say jump, Armrest requests information on altitude. He is fulfilling his role perfectly. He just doesn't know it. Yet. I know the right wingers on here desperately to want to blame 'lefties', but I think even they are starting to slowly wake up to the reality that the game all along was to reduce Labour to nothing more than a political irrelevance, and no threat to global corporate interests.

Those groups listed as likely to be proscribed in the party soon are just as much part of the problem as Starmer.

Don't be so silly. You're talking about a few dozen, tops, people who aren't all that bothered either way; Labour aren't representative of their ideals, so it's pointless them supporting the party. Their expulsion will achieve the square root of absolutely **** all. But continue to believe it's all their fault, if it makes you happy. I'm sure it'll be of great comfort, as you look forward to tory rule for the rest of your lives.

are just as much part of the problem as Starmer. And run by people outside the party wanting to damage it.

How on earth do you come to that conclusion?

Do really think as many people are saying "I'm not voting Labour because it's full of organisations which I have never heard of such as Socialist Appeal" as are saying "I'm not voting Labour because I haven't got a clue what they stand for and their leader doesn't inspire me"?

I very much doubt that you do and your comment was just simply a need to have a dig at the left.

And the suggestion that they want to damage the Labour Party is equally ridiculous. Unlikely the Blairite right they have no interest in a Tory government.

Do really think as many people are saying “I’m not voting Labour because it’s full of organisations which I have never heard of such as Socialist Appeal” as are saying “I’m not voting Labour because I haven’t got a clue what they stand for and their leader doesn’t inspire me”?

There are many people who are utterly turned off by a Labour Party always at war with itself, mostly over issues that concern them not one jot. Starmer has failed to change that image of the Party. Campaign groups that are designed to damage the party, and run by people outside it, are part of the problem as well.

The second issue is also true, people are not inspired by Starmer... as I predicted in 2019. They never will be.

I very much doubt that you do and your comment was just simply a need to have a dig at the left.

No, a dig at each and every one of those campaign groups listed as likely to be proscribed. Not a dig at "the left" more generally... which in my opinion is 80% plus of Labour members, and a good 40% of its voters.

Labour is already run by people outside the party wanting to damage it. They say jump, Armrest requests information on altitude. He is fulfilling his role perfectly. He just doesn’t know it. Yet.

The Unions? They essentially funded the 2019 GE campaign.

I know the right wingers on here desperately to want to blame ‘lefties’, but I think even they are starting to slowly wake up to the reality that the game all along was to reduce Labour to nothing more than a political irrelevance, and no threat to global corporate interests.

Whose game?

Most politicians of any colour agree on the need for an effective opposition for parliamentary democracy to work.

So Google, apple, Starbucks, etc in the tax dodging global entities.

Sovereign wealth funds?

Or other "forces"

Dig dig dig dig dig dig dig dig dig.....

Dig dig dig dig dig dig dig dig dig…..

Clearly some reference beyond me.

Is it a 50 cent army thing?

When unions are putting in £5m of a 2019 £5.4m GE spend for JC I can see why he's so beholden to other donations.... not

The £4m of individual donations to the Brexit party was a good scam for them

The Unions? They essentially funded the 2019 GE campaign.

I take it you know that each union member can choose whether or not to donate to Labour?

If only those he is fighting with also put more effort into fighting the Tories than the Labour party leader.

This is one of the most ridiculous things you've ever posted, and there is healthy competition on that front.

are just as much part of the problem as Starmer. And run by people outside the party wanting to damage it.

Oh wait there's this too.

I take it you know that each union member can choose whether or not to donate to Labour?

As I understand it they agree to contribute to the political fund.
I did for 30 years.

Union then distributes or uses it to pay libel awards

As I understand it they agree to contribute to the political fund.

Absolutely no obligation to do so.

I'm a union member and had to opt in to donate to Labour.

The second issue is also true, people are not inspired by Starmer… as I predicted in 2019. They never will be.

Who can inspire who is a sitting labour MP?

One aspect of this could be that the policy vacuum is due to the risk that Boris will steal all the best ideas. Boris doesn't have any principles but does have an eye for things that go down well with the electorate and will happily jump on any bandwagon.

Or conference is the big reveal, remember he hasn't had one yet as leader

Go on then Grum, pick one of those campaign groups named in the Guardian that you support think should not be excluded, and we can discus their stated motivations and who runs them.

remember he hasn’t had one yet as leader

Yep, and it’s probably far too late now to use one to build up his momentum. His opportunity has gone (if he was ever going to have one). He’ll be gone by the next election.

I’m a union member and had to opt in to donate to Labour.

Your point is?

Unions are still massively important to labour GE campaigns, they also have an influence on policy. It's not a surprise, they dwarf other contributors.

Which is why allegations that Starmer has been bought for lose change seems odd. Or the sort of thing you would say if you were undermining him. I imagine Starmer was spending a lot of time on zoom calls with Union leaders to ensure the taps didn't get turned off.

Yep, and it’s probably far too late now to use one to build up his momentum. His opportunity has gone (if he was ever going to have one). He’ll be gone by the next election.

There's a chance, it gets full coverage, something barnstorming might cut through.

It shouldn't be all about him though, if the front bench are missing the target then the mountain gets higher

Your point is?

Unions are still massively important to labour GE campaigns, they also have an influence on policy. It’s not a surprise, they dwarf other contributors.

Sorry, I thought it was obvious.

"Union" donations are in fact individual decisions by individual members. Which is one reason why it's a heck of a lot more democratic than corporate donations.

Miliband at his worst, the union funding issue. Over and over Cameron threw "you're funded by unions!" at him and he just went sorry, sorry, yes, I know, sorry. Literally 2 things he had to say:

Union donations are actually donations made by union members, I've no problem receiving donations from everyday working people. You're funded by millionaires, you bought-and-paid-for hypocrite.

80% of Tory donations for the last election came from the Leader's Group which has a minimum £50000 donation and literally buys you dinner meetings with the PM at Downing Street and Chequers and direct access to cabinet ministers. Just 15 donors provided £4.4m. 20% of the Leaders' Group have received an Honour after their donation (as of 2019). And as the Leader's Group donations have gone up and up, they've broken David Cameron's pledge on openness and stopped publishing the details of who is donating. Oh, 97% of the people at the dinners and meetings are male.

But boo unions!

To be fair it was Tony Blair who popularised the idea that any close relationship with the trade unions was toxic for Labour.

Blair made it much easier for David Cameron to exploit that theme. And Ed Miliband was a naive party apparatchik out of his depth.

Buying Sir Kim for loose change is a vile trope.

Who can inspire who is a sitting labour MP?

One aspect of this could be that the policy vacuum is due to the risk that Boris will steal all the best ideas. Boris doesn’t have any principles but does have an eye for things that go down well with the electorate and will happily jump on any bandwagon.

That is the problem they have, get rid of Starmer and replace with?
Their strategy should be to first find someone who will be a popular front man for the voters and get them into a safe seat and then make them leader. That would be pretty much impossible within the current process of leadership though.

As for stealing ideas, that is where Starmer is most useless. He doesn't know how to play politics. NHS pay rise was an easy one. Should have said Labour would give 15%, Tories end up giving 3% boo but actually said they would give 2.1%, Tories give 3.1%, hooray

Buying Sir Kim for loose change is a vile trope.

I agree, anyone saying the labour leader has been bought should take a long look at themselves

As for policies there are some easy wins that would be unpalatable for Boris. Favourite on here is nationalising water, except what you do is do it only for the failing companies such as Southern and only after you have inspected them to demonstrate the issues to negate any value or payment to shareholders (asset underinvestment would be significant and a lot of kit they claim is operational won't be, add in future liabilities and you should get there. Same for the power companies if they are playing the same game.

Green and pleasant land, grip and fund EA and NE, enable prosecution, stiffen penalties demand performance from the regulators. Tie in with investment in land management to also get a massive carbon and flood management benefit.

Green steel, solve the coking coal problem by making UK steel green, strategic investment in West Cumbria to offset the lost mine opportunity

Etc

Apparently he is going for crime as the next initiative

It is not quite as catchy as “tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime”, but Keir Starmer’s pledge “to drive down crime, tackle its root causes and ensure that criminals are brought to justice” will be an important part of the period between now and the next election.

He really needs someone who can create a snappy, catchy phrase for these things

Arguably it's a good place to stand for him, but GMP and Burnham's weaknesses provide a soft under belly. He can tear into Grayling's legacy, talk about justice denied, a system paralyzed, ungoverned spaces, police and agencies morale at rock bottom, prison reform neglected.

Can he do it all via zoom?

Forget Burnham. He's just a Poundshop Starmer.

agree, anyone saying the labour leader has been bought should take a long look at themselves

Lol! Do you not know how politics actually works? Have you forgotten Tony Blair? The only Labour leader who hasn't been bought, is Corbyn. It was principles, and his refusal to be bought by corporate and capitalist interests, the led to his demise. Starmer's been for sale for ages; it's just that nobody's all that interested in a stale, boring product.

It was principles, and his refusal to be bought by corporate and capitalist interests, the led to his demise

Other interpretations are available for the less deluded/non cult members/people who've finished their A levels

It was actually the fact that he was absolutely ****ing hopeless and lost two consecutive elections that led to his demise

Speaking of stale and tired products... 😀 Like a moth to a flame.

Have you paid that tenner to that charity yet?

Rod Liddle; spitting crisps all over himself...

You seem to be unfamiliar with the basic concept of betting.

Let me explain: When you offer up a bet, the other party has to accept it

Simple, isn't it?

Maybe you better reconsider that career as a bookie?

Anyway: all STW bets are in the currency of Greggs vouchers. Everybody knows that

Let me explain: When you offer up a bet, the other party has to accept it

The TnCs are up there in black and white. Why not put your money where your mouth is, and do something useful, instead of spouting ignorant deluded shite on here every. single. day?

I'll go a bit further. For every week that you stay off this thread, I'll pay £25 to that charity. Or maybe you don't have the balls to face up to such a challenge?

Balls?

Challenge?

What on earth are you blathering on about?

Why do you even care whether I post on a thread or not? What conceivable difference does it make to anyone?

You're off your ****ing napper

So; you could actually make some positive difference in society, but your need for attention means you'll just continue to spout shite instead. Because that's obviously more important to you. At least we have now firmly established that.

Rod Liddle; little bit of vomit comes out as he rants...

Ooh look! It's learned to post gifs now! Isn't it clever? Bless.

No but seriously. £25. Per week.

Rod Liddle; bit of mayonnaise on his vest...

I can't comprehend why you even care?

You know that I'm not real, right? I'm a leftie-baiting bot in a server farm in Murmansk? And that arguing on an interweb forum is effectively shouting into a shipping container?

£25. Per week.

Rod Liddle; burps Chow Mein all over himself...

I'd miss you too much. Admit it, you'd miss me too, wouldn't you hun? X

£25. Per Week.

Rod Liddle; red wine and mustard stains on his shirt...

It was actually the fact that he was absolutely ****ing hopeless and lost two consecutive elections that led to his demise

Okay so your guy appears to be doing worse, and yet doesn't have Brexit, nor the tirade of character assassinations. Neither does he have Tom Watson, Austin or Mann to deal with.

But he has your support. So let's talk about his work shall we?

How do you think Starmer is doing?

I wouldn't expect any form of coherent answer, Rone. That would be a major break from tradition...

How do you think Starmer is doing?

I think he's doing absolutely terribly, to be honest.

Along with pretty much everyone else, I'm absolutely mystified as to why he's being so consistently timid and refusing to engage with the Torys, when he's had countless opportunities that have just gone begging

With Corbyn, when faced with an open net he'd always spoon it into Row Z, With Starmer he won't even shoot. God only knows why.

The silence from the labour front bench when faced with the rolling car crash of the last 12 months is absolutely inexplicable and unforgivable.

I've all but given up hope of ever seeing a labour government, and that is unbelievably depressing

Can't see the point in the rant then😄

A nice little recap of why and how we can pay more wages to the NHS workers or any function of the state.

https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1418484237246865411?s=19

Thread it out.

My favourite pick.

https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1418484251704635392?s=19

https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1418484262173609985?s=19

With Corbyn, when faced with an open net he’d always spoon it into Row Z, With Starmer he won’t even shoot. God only knows why

Corbyn was always stuck in a zero sum game. Starmer doesn't really have that.

Fair comments.

I think it's important to see this once more:

I’m just hoping the rumours are true (IIRC it was in the Guardian) that the first thing Kier Starmer is going to do is have a night of the long knives to clear out every last one of the utterly useless Corbynites, both on the front bench and behind the scenes, and actually appoint some people who are capable of finding their own arses using both hands.

I’m also hoping that involves firing Richard Burgon into the sun.

There needs to be a Kinnock/Militant style purge to even think dragging the labour party back from its Corbynite political irrelevence, where its presently languishing in its own delusional ‘we won the argument’ bullshit

Then, finally, when pushed on how that's actually working out:

I think he’s doing absolutely terribly, to be honest.

😀 Lol! You don't need any A-Levels to work that out! It must sting, that. Try a bit of Germolene.

Good to see Dawn Butler sticking to her principles, and refusing to retract her comments about Boris being a liar. If only Armrest had such courage...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57927398

Dawn Butler was just on LBC and she just said we are in a system that defends the liars, as we move to a Trumpian stage.

She said she was sick of the amount of lies.

I like this basic passion in an MP.

The fact that Dawn Butler is punished for stating the obvious, while Johnson continues to spout lie after lie with total impunity just demonstrates how ****ed our political system is

It stands as a metaphor for the UK in 2021

The fact that Dawn Butler is punished for stating the obvious, while Johnson continues to spout lie after lie with total impunity just demonstrates how ****ed our political system is

It stands as a metaphor for the UK in 2021

Dawn Butler could have said the same thing in different words and not been punished. She did it for the activists, I imagine they loved it. No representation in parliament for her constituency for a few days

Metaphor for labour in 2021

Why not put your money where your mouth is, and do something useful, instead of spouting ignorant deluded shite on here every. single. day?

The ironing.....

Rod Liddle; red wine and mustard stains on his shirt…

Is this some form of code? Is it a 50 cent army thing, do you have a man crush?

No representation in parliament for her constituency for a few days

It's Summer recess, is it not? So timed to that I'd imagine.

It’s Summer recess, is it not? So timed to that I’d imagine.

Good point, at least the timing is smart. Is she on manoeuvres for the leadership?

 Is she on manoeuvres for the leadership?

On the basis that she can probably walk and chew at the same time? Probably should be

doesn’t have Brexit, nor the tirade of character assassinations

Well, he does. No excuses though, he's still doing even worse than I feared he would.

Is she on manoeuvres for the leadership?

Presumably she'll stand to be deputy leader again, if the current deputy stands to be leader. I'm not looking for any cynical motivations for what she did yesterday though. More should call Johnson out on the parliamentary record, as he keeps lying to parliament and not facing any consequences to do so. Her LBC interview was spot on as regards pointing out why truth still matters, and why acting as if it no longer does is so dangerous. Worth a listen.

The ironing…..

Coming from someone who keeps trolling with accusations of people using 'tropes' (and even admits it's all made up). Are you an Alanis Morisette fan? xD

do you have a man crush?

Veiled attempt at some sort of homophobic slur? An explanation would be good.

I’m not looking for any cynical motivations for what she did yesterday though

Nope me neither, just looked like it was borne of frustration.

Dawn Butler could have said the same thing in different words and not been punished. She did it for the activists, I imagine they loved it. No representation in parliament for her constituency for a few days

The Deputy Speaker then ordered Ms Butler to withdraw from the Commons for the rest of the day's sitting.

Don't let facts spoil your rhetoric, eh?

Challenging the archaic and outdated 'rules' of Parliament takes courage. Shame Armrest hasn't got any.